<p>I am all for Huckabee becoming the GOP nominee it will guarantee a huge Democratic victory.</p>
<p>I agree runmanstl. That’s why he won’t get the nomination</p>
<p>I still think That Woman will be the next president.</p>
<p>“Mini, you can be a “strict constructionist” and still think the amendments to the Constitution were, well, Constitutional. The process of change is embedded in the Constitution, and I do not think that changing it following due process makes one a nonconstructionist.”</p>
<p>Using God as reasoning to amend the Constitution about ANYTHING is well outside the process of change, and the entire reasoning behind the Constitution. At the time it was written, of the 13 colonies and commonwealths, ALL of them referred to God or the Supreme Being. The writers of the Constitution made an overt decision to leave God out of it, and the only reference to religion in the entire document is a negative one (no religious test). This was one of the reasons Patrick Henry radically opposed adoption of the Constitution, and there were movements among the religious in other states to block its adoption. THEY LOST. No God. End of story. (Note: the same people who wrote the Declaration in 1776 by 1789, in many cases, believed very different things. During this period, George Washington even refused communion in his own church.)</p>
<p>I can be a strict constructionist then and favor the abolition of the 2nd Amendment, and favor the appointment of activist judges (meaning: liberal, the current conservative crop have already proven their judicial activism.) Do words have meaning any more?</p>
<p>TheDad: That’s entertaining about Evangelicals and taking over SC, given that a similar movement is regularly bandied about among libertarians with respect to NH.</p>
<p>ZM, race, sex, and religion are always key demographic factors when discussion politics. Maybe one of the days you come out here and I’ll give you a quick three-day course on polling, demographics, and elections…and you can sight-see in SoCal afterwards. The point is that blacks, while a minority in South Carolina, are a majority of the Democrats and black-white racial relations still color statewide political outcomes. Following up your query as to if there were no Democrats in SC (post #57). Closer than you might imagine among white voters.</p>
<p>“Using God as reasoning to amend the Constitution about ANYTHING is well outside the process of change, and the entire reasoning behind the Constitution”</p>
<p>Is it really? Does the process actually require reasoning or is the potential amendment enough on its own? In other words, if someone wanted to add XX amendment and it was able to pass through the process, would the reason be relevant?</p>
<p>“Following up your query as to if there were no Democrats in SC (post #57). Closer than you might imagine among white voters.”</p>
<p>But there actually are black voters or are you saying that blacks turn out at a lower rate?</p>
<p>“Is it really? Does the process actually require reasoning or is the potential amendment enough on its own? In other words, if someone wanted to add XX amendment and it was able to pass through the process, would the reason be relevant?”</p>
<p>The reasoning would be VERY relevant - in fact, it is precisely this reasoning upon which Supreme Court justices makes their decisions. What WAS, for example, the intent and reasoning behind the Second Amendment?</p>
<p>There are black voters but the Democratic party is definitely a minority party, in both senses of the word. Effectively, the Democratic party has very little force. Your post #57 suggests otherwise; yes, SC has been effectively politically cleansed. If I were a Democrat, other than black running in a minority-majority Congressional district, I’d rather take my chances in Utah or Idaho running statewide. Mississippi or Wyoming in a shot.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Starting a pre-emptive war is not liberal. I’m not sure how much in alignment his views are with hagee’s, but hagee wants to orchestrate events to CAUSE ‘Armageddon’ so Jesus will return. THAT’s scary! huckabee was a guest at hagee’s mega-church just before Christmas. Again, I don’t know exactly what huckabee thinks of hagee’s views, but rumor has it that they’re pretty tight. IF that’s true, then anyone who wants huckabee better be aware that they’d be getting hagee too. THAT’s really scary!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good point. God has already called him on his cell phone! And, according to huckabee, God has already orchestrated huckabee’s rise in the polls and in the primaries.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have a background in network marketing so I’m familiar with the power of networking. The evangelical community has a handle on this concept and a vocal minority uses it to their advantage. Just the structure of the churches alone lend themselves to fast networking. The fact that there is actually a PASTOR running for president, wow, that’s huge. Why do you think huckabee rose so high so fast?</p>
<p>What part of “SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE” does he NOT understand?</p>
<p>If you look at the doctrine of the Jesus Freaks they believe we have separation of church and state, as in that the state can not choose a church for us. But according to them we do not have freedom FROM Church.</p>
<p>Yes, and they define church as the Christian church. Many of them believe that this is supposed to be a Christian country.</p>
<p>Is it just me or would it be better if politicians actually operated according to the bible, and not their own exploitive/opinion/whatever of it.</p>
<p>Until we see a politician who REALLY functions according to my main dude G.O.D, it won’t matter what these people supposedly-base their politics on.</p>
<p>I’ll take anyone who is in favor of the least amount of government possible. Currently, that man is Ron Paul, but Huckabee is a close second.</p>
<p>And I really hate Huckabee.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If only. </p>
<p>Secularism is killing us…XD</p>
<p>Is it just me or would it be better if politicians actually operated according to the bible, and not their own exploitive/opinion/whatever of it.</p>
<p>[USATODAY.com</a> - The evolution of the Christian Bible](<a href=“http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2002-03-27-bible-timeline.htm]USATODAY.com”>http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2002-03-27-bible-timeline.htm)
Which model should we follow?
( I assume you meant to say- everyone- not just politicians 
)</p>
<p>
Wow I am Agnostic. I guess I should move to Canada or France.</p>
<p>
At least this Evangelical is honest. Let’s make no qualms about it. The Evangelicals, and by extension, the Republican Party will end secularism and force us all to obey right-wing Christian doctrine. I can’t wait to see Guiliani stoned for adultery, twice or once?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So am I. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Clearly you know nothing about Canada or France, or else you’d be more appreciative of their highly intolerant perspective towards civil and personal liberties.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Whoa, ya got me. XD </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is that like saying “#$@(!@# you”, but then conclude with, “no offense.”</p>
<p>Yeah, I think it is. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right. Because we all know the Republican Party is chock full of fundamentalists and the Democratic Party is just overwhelmingly tolerant and non-indoctrinating. XD XD XD</p>
<p>Your partisan agenda is not shocking, nor it is informed. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stop acting like this is a fundamentalist country. Nothing has changed in terms of religious imposed on governmental properties and citizens since Bush took office.</p>
<p>Just because he exploits the Christian masses and pretends to pray does not translate into “Amerika is teh theocrecy.” Abortion, divorce, murder, and theft are at their peak, qualities that do not exist in theocratic societies.</p>
<p>America is the most TRUE secularist nation on Earth, though that isn’t saying much. Soon the US will be just like Europe unless RP or Jesus himself takes the throne.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>1) Independent from the FEDERAL government (I hope you know what that means).</p>
<p>2) This has been going on well before Bush</p>
<p>3) Regardless of whether evolution or creationism is taught, students will not learn unless a major educational reform takes place. No point in wasting millions of dollars fighting stuff like this.</p>
<p>4) The bible thumping states have more positive test scores than there secular counterpart:</p>
<p>[Smartest</a> State 2006-2007](<a href=“http://www.morganquitno.com/edrank.htm]Smartest”>Smartest State 2006-2007)</p>
<p>cha-ching.</p>
<p>edit: srry for grammar, i need to sleep. kthxbye</p>
<p>“The reasoning would be VERY relevant - in fact, it is precisely this reasoning upon which Supreme Court justices makes their decisions. What WAS, for example, the intent and reasoning behind the Second Amendment?”</p>
<p>I don’t agree. I think that the only way the Constitution would ever be amended would be through a coalition of diferent interests.</p>
<p>Once the constitution is open…it will never be closed.</p>
<p>“Is that like saying “#$@(!@# you”, but then conclude with, “no offense.””</p>
<p>No. It’s like saying to the voters, “Here are the ten ways I’m planning to screw up the country.” Which means we can say to the voters, “Here’s the hundred reasons why you shouldn’t vote for a guy who wants to do those ten things.”</p>
<p>This kind of rhetoric is a HUGE improvement over “I’m a compassionate conservative…I’m a uniter, not a divider…I respect human life…” and other such BS that has nothing to do with policy. It’s extremely difficult to have a debate about issues when a candidate won’t say what his real positions are or what he’s going to do.</p>