Huck on the ticket means I change my registration as well.

Too bad libertarians aren’t an officially recognized party in NY.

Did I say that? :-0

But this piece is not even close to the best “hit-job” anyone can put on Huck. His taxes, his lousy immigration policies, his flip-flops on both of those. In other words, his lousy policies, and his willingness to change them for the sake of votes, will guarantee he steals no Ron Paul followers.

And if you’re talking about a candidate who people need to make big stretches to do a “hit-job” on – as the whole “Ron Paul is a nutter” seems to be the best anyone can do (with occasional pathetic attempts at putting his name in headlines next to brothel owners and such), I’d say the media’s got a lot less to hit Paul with than Huck.

Seriously, Huck is scary. If he gets the nomination, I’m changing parties.

Scott, agreed. My guess is Huck’s momentum dies, but you never can underestimate the culture-war evangelicals, can you?

I just added Ron Paul’s “Sign Me Up” widget to my blog. Huckabee doesn’t make me cringe the way Giuliani, Romney, and Hillary do, but I’m sure hoping his surge doesn’t harm Ron Paul’s momentum.

1) What we knew about AIDS in 1992 is much different than what we know now. On top of that, Huckabee, or others slightly older than him, grew up in an era where people with chicken pox, measles and mumps were isolated due to the threat to public health threat that they posed. People can recover from those diseases … AIDS kills 100% of the people infected with it! AIDS did (and does) pose a public health threat … and for 1992, his suggestion wasn’t a bad one.

2) Huckabee didn’t say he was categorically against AIDS research. He said he was against increased federal funding for AIDS research. By that statement, he’s not even against federal funding for AIDS research … just increased federal funding. That’s a good conservative position … less government. And as an alternative, he suggested that we urge Hollywood icons who were calling for more federally-funded AIDS research to fund it themselves, privately. That’s not as egregious of a statement as the article and the MSM wants to make it out to be.

3) Finally, don’t think this issue is going to force Huckabee into “flip-flopping” from his original statement. He’s not going to come out and say, “You know what, over the past 16 years I’ve come to realize that homosexuality isn’t unnatural; that we should increase federally-funded AIDS research, and that we shouldn’t be concerned about the public health threat AIDS poses.” Instead look for him to say, honestly, “I did say those things 16 years ago …”, and then he’ll provide some context for the comments and add some genuine compassion to them. It’ll rally his base even more, and he’ll still finish in the top 3 in Iowa, NH, and SC … and then who knows what.

Huck might even pick up some Ron Paul voters over the whole thing!

No question the media will play it up for all it’s worth … and more. But at the end of the day it’s impact will be negligible. In many ways, Huckabee was simply willing to say at the time what the overwhelming majority of people were only willing to privately consider in their own minds! That’s the mark of a leader.

It’s funny to me that the best hit-job anyone can put on him is a 16 year old answer to a survey question … an answer, which considering its context is fairly right on the mark!

And by the way, for any Ron Paul follower to call Huckabee crazy or out of touch with reality because of this … not even the phrase, “the pot calling the kettle black” does justice to that!