Huckabee Says He Could Win White House

[Soul Crusher]

McCain didn't have to be religious in his campaign.  Palin took over that part with much horrible effects.

It came down to the lesser of the two evils.

Yeah, how did that work out for you?    

Biden makes a gaffe an hour, an obama is laughed at worldwide. 

[LurkerNoMore]

If you care at all (which you probably don't), just go back and read your posts on the board and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.  Or not.

What you did was call Huckabee a religious nut.  And now you're calling him a "religious candidate."  On what basis you call him a religious nut, and a "religious candidate"?  

No.  I meant nut.  Wait hang on a second.


*thinking*   <-- unusual activity for some of you I know, but should try it sometimes


Ahhh, yes.   Nut was what I meant when referring to Huck.  As for what my other statement said that you didn't understand it was a generalization of "candidates".  Plural you know.  Meaning no specific one.  I think I was very specific about Huck.

[LurkerNoMore]

Yeah, how did that work out for you?    

Biden makes a gaffe an hour, an obama is laughed at worldwide. 

Since McCan't and Failin haven't had a term yet to compare by, that is a moot issue.  A "what if" question that there is no answer for.  It's bad now, but who is to say under those two it wouldn't have been worse?  Or better?  Or the same? 

[Soul Crusher]

Since McCan't and Failin haven't had a term yet to compare by, that is a moot issue.  A "what if" question that there is no answer for.  It's bad now, but who is to say under those two it wouldn't have been worse?  Or better?  Or the same? 

Great campaign message for2012:  "Vote for me, it could have been worse!" 

[LurkerNoMore]

Palin's could be "Vote For Me And It Will Be Worse"

[Dos Equis]

No.  I meant nut.  Wait hang on a second.


*thinking*   <-- unusual activity for some of you I know, but should try it sometimes


Ahhh, yes.   Nut was what I meant when referring to Huck.  As for what my other statement said that you didn't understand it was a generalization of "candidates".  Plural you know.  Meaning no specific one.  I think I was very specific about Huck.

You're confused.  Here is what you said:

Huck won't win because the nation doesn't vote to put religious nuts into Office.

You called Huck a "religious nut." 

Then you broadened your comment:

I really like how the only defense in a direct observation regarding religious candidates running for office is met with such a hypocritical statement that it is almost funny.

Almost.

So my questions are, again:

On what basis you call him a religious nut, and a "religious candidate"?  

[240 is Back]

huck said he doesn't believe the bible LITERALLY.

I respect him a lot for that.  Nutjobs like Christine ODonnell wouldn't admit that. 

[Dos Equis]

huck said he doesn't believe the bible LITERALLY.

I respect him a lot for that.  Nutjobs like Christine ODonnell wouldn't admit that. 

O Rly?  What his exact quote.  Not like I don't believe you or anything. . . . .

[LurkerNoMore]

Where did you see the word HUCK in my second statement you quoted?  It isn't there.

After the prior explanation of it, I can't dumb it down any further for you.  Sorry.

[240 is Back]

O Rly?  What his exact quote.  Not like I don't believe you or anything. . . . .

it was in the 2007 debates.  Huck said the bible was a book that taught a great lesson, but isnt' meant to be taken literally.  Then he gave a specific example, "Do I really think so-and-so spend 40 days in a whale's belly?  Of course not.  But it's the lessons that the bible taught that were true, and important."

Oh my gosh... I just shattered your world, didn't I?  You thought Huck was a literalist?  He's not.  We talked about it 2 years ago, and I'm sure google has it. 

Huck's not a lliteralist.  He's not, hoss.

[Dos Equis]

Where did you see the word HUCK in my second statement you quoted?  It isn't there.

After the prior explanation of it, I can't dumb it down any further for you.  Sorry.

Are you serious?  Is that it??  I asked you two questions.  Granted, this is the internet and you don't have to answer, but let's look at each one:

1.  You called Huck a religious nut.  Then you tried to say you only called him a "nut."  But I've quoted you.  And I'm asking again, if you choose to respond, on what basis do you call him a religious nut?  

2.  This thread is about Huck, your first comment was about Huck, your second comment attempted to further explain your first:  "I really like how the only defense in a direct observation regarding religious candidates running for office."  The only candidate running for office that you referred to was Huck.  So I'll ask again, on what basis do you call him a "religious candidate."  Or I'll make it even simpler, how do you define a "religious candidate"?  

[Dos Equis]

it was in the 2007 debates.  Huck said the bible was a book that taught a great lesson, but isnt' meant to be taken literally.  Then he gave a specific example, "Do I really think so-and-so spend 40 days in a whale's belly?  Of course not.  But it's the lessons that the bible taught that were true, and important."

Oh my gosh... I just shattered your world, didn't I?  You thought Huck was a literalist?  He's not.  We talked about it 2 years ago, and I'm sure google has it. 

Huck's not a lliteralist.  He's not, hoss.

I'm not Googling anything.  He could very well have said it, but as I've told you repeatedly, I take nothing you say at face value because you're a pathological liar.

[240 is Back]

I'm not Googling anything.  He could very well have said it, but as I've told you repeatedly, I take nothing you say at face value because you're a pathological liar.

why the anger?  Is it because I have clear defined abs and you do not?

[LurkerNoMore]

Are you serious?  Is that it??  I asked you two questions.  Granted, this is the internet and you don't have to answer, but let's look at each one:

1.  You called Huck a religious nut.  Then you tried to say you only called him a "nut."  But I've quoted you.  And I'm asking again, if you choose to respond, on what basis do you call him a religious nut?  

2.  This thread is about Huck, your first comment was about Huck, your second comment attempted to further explain your first:  "I really like how the only defense in a direct observation regarding religious candidates running for office."  The only candidate running for office that you referred to was Huck.  So I'll ask again, on what basis do you call him a "religious candidate."  Or I'll make it even simpler, how do you define a "religious candidate"?  

Yeah, that is it.   Inability to understand a simple post seems to be your problem not mine.

I said Huck in the first one.  Duh!!!

Second time there was no Huck.  I used plural form.  Remind me again how many HUCKS have been running for office?   That statement wasn't referring to Huck but a broad generalization.

 

[Dos Equis]

why the anger?  Is it because I have clear defined abs and you do not?

Anger?  LOL.  You have clear defined abs?  Really??   LOL . . . . Who the heck cares.  Are you gay?  I don't care what kind of body you have.  LOL . . . .

[Soul Crusher]

why the anger?  Is it because I have clear defined abs and you do not?

Bro - you also are skinny as shit.    

[Dos Equis]

Yeah, that is it.   Inability to understand a simple post seems to be your problem not mine.

I said Huck in the first one.  Duh!!!

Second time there was no Huck.  I used plural form.  Remind me again how many HUCKS have been running for office?   That statement wasn't referring to Huck but a broad generalization.

 

1.  On what basis do you call Huck a religious nut?  

2.  How do you define a "religious candidate"?  

[Dos Equis]

Bro - you also are skinny as shit.    

He has posted his pictures.  Not exactly the kind of body you envy.  lol . . . .

[240 is Back]

Anger?  LOL.  You have clear defined abs?  Really??   LOL . . . . Who the heck cares.  Are you gay?  I don't care what kind of body you have.  LOL . . . .

the lady doth protest a bit much?

[LurkerNoMore]

1.  On what basis do you call Huck a religious nut?  

2.  How do you define a "religious candidate"?  

1 - statements and views

2 - anyone relying on the jesus vote

[Dos Equis]

1 - statements and views

2 - anyone relying on the jesus vote

Thanks.  Regarding Huck, which ones?  Is it the fact he was a preacher, or are there specific "statements and views" that led you to your conclusion that he's a religious nut? 

Not sure what you mean by the "jesus vote."  I assume you mean the Christian conservative vote?