Monday, January 7, 2008


It appears there is a growing groundswell of opposition to the presidential campaign of Mike Huckabee. Sykes seems to be very adamant in his opposition to the Huckster's campaign. Whallah! is not the only one to notice this either.

And McIlheran, like the follower he is, is chiming in right behind. McIlheran's argument is that Huckabee didn't win the majority of the votes of evangelists, meaning more than 50%. He only won 40%, with the rest spread out among the other candidates. But even with 40%, with the rest spread out among a large number of candidates, that would give him the majority anyway, but since when did PaddyMac let facts get in his way.

Now, I could see Father PaddyMac not approving of a non-Catholic candidate, but one must wonder why Charlie feels so threatened by a strong Christian candidate. Especially when he continuously (and inaccurately) portrays himself as such a staunch defender of Christianity. Maybe he is just uncomfortable with that whole Ten Commandments thing.


  1. I think you're missing the fear factor. It is not the cultural conservatism that scares the money cons, but his class rhetoric. Most of Huckabee's support came from the rural poor and working class Iowans.

    If Huckabee was a little more of a money con, Sykes and other Neo Crybabies would be bowing at his excellency.

  2. (It would be a plurality, but whatever.) And quit propounding the idea that McIlheran has anything to do with Catholicism. He doesn't. He worships at the altar of the Bradley Foundation and their ilk.

  3. McIlheran propounds that idea himself.