Huckabee, Christians, O’Reilly – January 04, 2008
So I’m watching The O’Reilly Factor on Fox News tonight and I hear Mr. Bill remarking that 60% of Huckabee’s voters were Christians – Evangelicals and Home Schoolers, no less. He states that he doesn’t believe Huck can succeed in other states, such as New Hampshire which is more secular. As I understood him, he is convinced that these Christians voted for Mike Huckabee for one reason only – because Mike Huckabee is a Christian. He said they voted for values.
Juan Williams tried to enlighten O’Reilly to the fact that Christians have brains, too, and aren’t simple-minded pinheads. They vote on other issues that are important to them, just like every one else. Why would anyone be such a pinhead and think that becoming a Christian suddenly erases your brain, and makes you deaf, dumb and blind? Or that you don’t worry about illegal aliens bringing drugs across the border into your kids’ neighborhood. Or MS 13 gangs sneaking across the border and murdering you, your family and your friends. Or terrorists coming across the border into your city to blow you up.
Why would O’Reilly believe that Christians don’t vote for low taxes? Christians don’t want to pay exorbant taxes and many can’t afford to. O’Reilly can’t really believe that Christians don’t vote for limited government. Does he really think that Christians want a secular government tearing down their manger scenes at Christmas, restricting their right to pray on school grounds, closing churches because they voiced their political opinion on the church campus or in the pulpit, forcing the farse of evolution to be crammed down the throats of their children in public schools, and forcing parents to send their kids to schools which provide poor educations?
Does he believe that Christians don’t give any thought to the war on terrorism ? Does he know that Christians have sons and daughters in the military that fight for our freedom and protection overseas? That Christians recognize the importance of voting for the candidate that holds the same position on the war as they do?
Does he know that Christians care deeply about national sovereignty? That they are horrified at the notion that a president of the United States of America might sign a treaty that supersedes the Constitution and binds us to a world governing body whose make-up is stacked with Islamic dictatorships and monarchies, communist dictators, atheists, enemies of America, tyrrants and despots.
I’m an Evangelical Christian who home-educated my two children. I’m leaning toward Gov. Huckabee because I want the borders secured. I don’t want to reward illegal aliens. I want to fight Islamic extremist terrorists overseas and prevent them from attacking us here. I want lower taxes, secure borders, less government interference and meddling in my life, fewer restrictions and less oppressive government. I want to keep America free, “of the people, by the people and for the people” OF AMERICA – NOT ANY OTHER COUNTRY OR OUTSIDE GOVERNING BODY.
Juan tried to tell Bill O’Reilly that Christians didn’t have to limit the defnition of “values” to faith. Voting for Mike Huckabee isn’t an “either or” proposition. You can vote for Mike Huckabee and have it all.
NOTE TO BILL: “Evangelicals probably all hold the same beliefs, even politically. (Hint – they’re largely Republican, conservative, pro-life, pro-national sovereignty, pro-limited government, pro-religious freedom, anti-ILLEGAL alien, anti-open borders, etc.) Therefore, when they see an evangelical running for president, they pretty much know what he believes. Voting for him because he is a Christian, simply means that they know what he believes and stands for, even politically and that it matches their own political views. Plus, Huckabee has told them that he does.”
I would like to add that I believe you can also vote for Sen. Duncan Hunter and have it all. I am mystified at the media’s unwillingness to cover Sen. Duncan Hunter’s campaign equally with the others. This does not seem like professional reporting. It is not thorough, but lacking.