Connect with us

Mike Huckabee: ‘It’s Not My Nature To Be A Bully’

Published

on

Former governor Mike Huckabee on Sunday told ABC News, “it’s not my nature to be a bully.” Just how demonstrably false is that claim?

Speaking with ABC News journalist Martha Raddatz on Sunday’s “This Week,” Republican former governor Mike Huckabee lamented the demise of chivalry in political campaigns against women candidates.

Radditz cornered the 59-year old ordained Southern Baptist Minister on his comments, originally made in a New Republic interview. 

“You said I’ve run twice against women opponents and it’s a very different kind of approach for those of us who have some chivalry left there’s a level of respect to treat some things as a special treasure, you treat other things as common,” Radditz reminded him. “What do you mean specifically by that?”

Huckabee’s response was insincere and insufficient.

“Well, I just mean that you always want to be respectful. You want to treat everyone with respect. But in the culture of the south, the culture that I grew up with, I think chivalry is still alive. There’s a sense of that you pay a great deal of respect and you don’t come across as a bully.”

Perhaps realizing his poor answer, Huckabee concluded, “It’s not an issue of sexism, it’s an issue of simply understanding that every opponent, whether it’s a male, a female, whether they’re from the Northeast or from the Southwest, everybody has different nuances, and you always have to — because I’ve been in a lot of races. I’ve been in politics for 25 years. I’ve run a lot of races as lieutenant governor, for U.S. Senate, for governor two different times and for president.”

In between those fumblings, Radditz asked Huckabee if he would “run differently against Joe Biden?” as opposed to Hillary Clinton.

His odd response: “it’s not my nature to be a bully.”

But let’s take a look at that claim.

Huckabee, despite what some in the media are recently claiming is a more tolerant potential 2016 candidate for the White House, has used the LGBT community as a punching bag for years.

In 2006 “Brokeback Mountain” won three Academy Awards. Huckabee used the groundbreaking film to ensure conservative voters knew where he stood on same-sex marriage. “Until Moses comes down with two stone tablets from Brokeback Mountain saying he’s changed the rules,” Huckabee quipped, “let’s keep it like it is.”

Fast forward to today.

Last week on his Facebook page, Huckabee pushed his latest book by telling followers, “I have a very special and personal favor. My new book ‘God, Guns, Grits, and Gravy’ releases next week on Tuesday, January 20. It’s already generated a lot of attention because I make the case for why those who live with traditional moral values and respect for the Constitution aren’t the outliers.”

But then, without mentioning gay people, he attacks them.

The book was written with vivid illustrations of bigotry toward Christians and in plain language. 

I detail the attacks on our friends like the Duggars, the Benhams, and the Robertsons of Duck Dynasty and provide many examples of the intolerance of the secular left, all delivered or course, in the name of “tolerance.”

In October, Huckabee put away his “chivalry” and “respect” he claims to show women, to rail against Houston Mayor Annise Parker, telling her to, “Keep your filthy government hands off of religious liberty.” It’s the only record we could find of Huckabee using the word “filthy” to describe a person – and in this case, a person who happens to be a lesbian.

That month Huckabee also posted an outlandish, false, fear-mongering, hate-filled, anti-gay warning on Facebook, and later Huckabee demanded the Republican Party “grow a spine” and not back down in their fight against same-sex marriage, or, he threatened, he would quit the party. 

The following month Huckabee compared Nazi Germany to America, and told a group of pastors that same-sex marriage will destroy the foundation of civilization.

Earlier last year, at the National Organization For Marriage’s rally in Washington, D.C., Huckabee wrongly told a small crowd that Martin Luther King, Jr. would have opposed same-sex marriage like he opposed Hitler.

These attacks are not new. Huckabee has a long and ugly history of bullying gay people and their allies.

In 2010 he compared legalizing same-sex marriage to legalizing incest, polygamy, and drug use. The following year he called same-sex couples parenting of children “experiments,” and their families “guinea pigs.” 

In 2008 he offered this theocratic opinion: “I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than try to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view.”

The following year he said he wanted to “isolate” HIV/AIDS victims. That same year he told Ann Coulter, “I am definitely not pro-sodomy. I promise. Scout’s honor.”

In 2013, Huckabee lamented he was forced to see same-sex couples on TV.

Claiming Chick-fil-A was being smeared by vicious hate speech and intolerant bigotry from the left, Huckabee in 2012 created National Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day, which he helped turn into a national attack on LGBT people. That year he also declared that the Boy Scouts – which at that point had decided to continue its ban on gay scouts – had done the right thing because, he claimed, gays abuse children.

In the series, “Before They Were Candidates,” the Concord Monitor profiled several 2008 presidential candidates. “‘Bullying’ gays wasn’t priority for Huckabee” before he ran for the White House, the Monitor reported. 

On gay rights, “Rita Sklar, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, said Huckabee’s rhetoric was often ‘extremely unpleasant or sarcastic.'”

“‘He is hardly ever outright nasty,’ Sklar said. ‘But he is suggestively nasty.'”

Clearly, presidential campaigns have changed that.

 

Image via YouTube

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

‘I Hope You Find Happiness’: Moskowitz Trolls Comer Over Impeachment Fail

Published

11 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) is mocking House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer over a CNN report revealing the embattled Kentucky Republican who has been alleging without proof President Joe Biden is the head of a vast multi-million dollar criminal bribery and influence-peddling conspiracy, has given up trying to impeach the leader of the free world.

CNN on Wednesday had reported, “after 15 months of coming up short in proving some of his biggest claims against the president, Comer recently approached one of his Republican colleagues and made a blunt admission: He was ready to be ‘done with’ the impeachment inquiry into Biden.” The news network described Chairman Comer as “frustrated” and his investigation as “at a dead end.”

One GOP lawmaker told CNN, “Comer is hoping Jesus comes so he can get out.”

“He is fed up,” the Republican added.

Despite the Chairman’s alleged remarks, “a House Oversight Committee spokesperson maintains that ‘the impeachment inquiry is ongoing and impeachment is 100% still on the table.'”

RELATED: ‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

Last week, Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) got into a shouting match with Chairman Comer, with the Maryland Democrat saying, “You have not identified a single crime – what is the crime that you want to impeach Joe Biden for and keep this nonsense going?” and Comer replying, “You’re about to find out.”

Before those heated remarks, Congressman Raskin chided Comer, humorously threatening to invite Rep. Moskowitz to return to the hearing.

Congressman Moskowitz appears to be the only member of the House Oversight Committee who has ever made a motion to call for a vote on impeaching President Biden, which he did last month, although he did it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

It appears the Moskowitz-Comer “bromance” may be over.

Wednesday afternoon Congressman Moskowitz, whose sarcasm is becoming well-known, used it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

“I was hoping our breakup would never become public,” he declared. “We had such a great thing while it lasted James. I will miss the time we spent together. I will miss our conversations. I will miss the pet names you gave me. I only wish you the best and hope you find happiness.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Published

13 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case centered on the question, can the federal government require states with strict abortion bans to allow physicians to perform abortions in emergency situations, specifically when the woman’s health, but not her life, is in danger?

The 1986 federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), signed into law by Republican President Ronald Reagan, says it can. The State of Idaho on Wednesday argued it cannot.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, The Washington Post’s Kim Bellware reported, “made a clear delineation between Idaho law and what EMTALA provides.”

“In Idaho, doctors have to shut their eyes to everything except death,” Prelogar said, according to Bellware. “Whereas under EMTALA, you’re supposed to be thinking about things like, ‘Is she about to lose her fertility? Is her uterus going to become incredibly scarred because of the bleeding? Is she about to undergo the possibility of kidney failure?’ ”

READ MORE: Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Attorney Imani Gandy, an award-winning journalist and Editor-at-Large for Rewire News Group, highlighted an issue central to the case.

“The issue of medical judgment vs. good faith judgment is a huge one because different states have different standards of judgment,” she writes. “If a doctor exercises their judgment, another doctor expert witness at trial could question that. That’s a BIG problem here. That’s why doctors are afraid to provide abortions. They may have an overzealous prosecutor come behind them and disagree.”

Right-wing Justice Samuel Alito appeared to draw the most fire from legal experts, as his questioning suggested “fetal personhood” should be the law, which it is not.

“Justice Alito is trying to import fetal personhood into federal statutory law by suggesting federal law might well prohibit hospitals from providing abortions as emergency stabilizing care,” observed Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis.

Paraphrasing Justice Alito, Kreis writes: “Alito: How can the federal government restrict what Idaho criminalizes simply because hospitals in Idaho have accepted federal funds?”

Appearing to answer that question, Georgia State University College of Law professor of law and Constitutional scholar Eric Segall wrote: “Our Constitution unequivocally allows the federal gov’t to offer the states money with conditions attached no matter how invasive b/c states can always say no. The conservative justices’ hostility to the spending power is based only on politics and values not text or history.”

Professor Segall also served up some of the strongest criticism of the right-wing justice.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

He wrote that Justice Alito “is basically making it clear he doesn’t care if pregnant women live or die as long as the fetus lives.”

Earlier Wednesday morning Segall had issued a warning: “Trigger alert: In about 20 minutes several of the conservative justices are going to show very clearly that that they care much more about fetuses than women suffering major pregnancy complications which is their way of owning the libs which is grotesque.”

Later, predicting “Alito is going to dissent,” Segall wrote: “Alito is dripping arrogance and condescension…in a case involving life, death, and medical emergencies. He has no bottom.”

Taking a broader view of the case, NYU professor of law Melissa Murray issued a strong warning: “The EMTALA case, Moyle v. US, hasn’t received as much attention as the mifepristone case, but it is huge. Not only implicates access to emergency medical procedures (like abortion in cases of miscarriage), but the broader question of federal law supremacy.”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Published

15 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

Hours before his attorneys would mount a defense on Tuesday claiming he had not violated his gag order Donald Trump might have done just that in a 12-minute taped interview that morning, which did not air until later that day. It will be up to Judge Juan Merchan to make that decision, if prosecutors add it to their contempt request.

Prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office told Judge Juan Merchan that the ex-president violated the gag order ten times, via posts on his Truth Social platform, and are asking he be held in contempt. While the judge has yet to rule, he did not appear moved by their arguments. At one point, Judge Merchan told Trump’s lead lawyer Todd Blanche he was “losing all credibility” with the court.

And while Judge Merchan directed defense attorneys to provide a detailed timeline surrounding Trump’s Truth Social posts to prove he had not violated the gag order, Trump in an interview with a local television station appeared to have done so.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

The gag order bars Trump from “commenting or causing others to comment on potential witnesses in the case, prospective jurors, court staff, lawyers in the district attorney’s office and the relatives of any counsel or court staffer, as CBS News reported.

“The threat is very real,” Judge Merchan wrote when he expanded the gag order. “Admonitions are not enough, nor is reliance on self-restraint. The average observer, must now, after hearing Defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well. Such concerns will undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself.”

Tuesday morning, Trump told ABC Philadelphia’s Action News reporter Walter Perez, “Michael Cohen is a convicted liar. He’s got no credibility whatsoever.”

He repeated that Cohen is a “convicted liar,” and insisted he “was a lawyer for many people, not just me.”

READ MORE: ‘Old and Tired and Mad’: Trump’s Demeanor in Court Detailed by Rachel Maddow

Since Cohen is a witness in Trump’s New York criminal case, Judge Merchan might decide Trump’s remarks during that interview violated the gag order, if prosecutors bring the video to his attention.

Enter attorney George Conway, who has been attending Trump’s New York trial.

Conway reposted a clip of the video, tagged Manhattan District Attorney Bragg, writing: “cc: @ManhattanDA, for your proposed order to show cause why the defendant in 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘷. 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 should not spend some quiet time in lockup.”

Trump has been criminally indicted in four separate cases and is facing a total of 88 felony charges, including 34 in this New York criminal trial for alleged falsification of business records to hide payments of “hush money” to an adult film actress and one other woman, in an alleged effort to suppress their stories and protect his 2016 presidential campaign, which experts say is election interference.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.