Mike Huckabee wants to amend the Constitution to “God’s standards.”

If ever there was any doubt that Mike Huckabee is a Theocrat through and through then he just removed it while speaking here in Michigan before the primary:

The Raw Story | Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in ‘God’s standards’

“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution,” Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. “But 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.”

When Willie Geist reported Huckabee’s opinion on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, co-host Mika Brzezinski was almost speechless, and even Joe Scarborough couldn’t immediately find much to say beyond calling it “interesting,”

Scarborough finally suggested that while he believes “evangelicals should be able to talk politics … some might find that statement very troubling, that we’re going to change the Constitution to be in line with the Bible. And that’s all I’m going to say.”

Troubling? Gee, ya think? After seven years of the Bush Administration I honestly thought that anything other than Bush would be an improvement. Mike Huckabee appears determined to prove me wrong. If this asshole actually somehow manages to win the White House I’ll have no choice but to seriously consider moving to a more sane country. I don’t know if I could handle sitting through four—and possibly up to eight—years of a Theocrat president.

50 thoughts on “Mike Huckabee wants to amend the Constitution to “God’s standards.”

  1. Remember too, the next president could appoint two justices to the Supreme Court.  What country are we going to?

  2. I’d like it if everyone lived under the government they voted for – so if you vote for an oppressive, fanatical party then you live under it’s rules, and that no party can affect those who didn’t vote for them

    That way people’d make their mistakes and learn first hand

  3. Huckabee appears to be proposing four amendments:
    1. the Fair Tax requires a constitutional amendment to eliminate the Sixteenth Amendment;
    2. a Human Life amendment;
    3. an amendment to define marriage;
    and now,
    4. an amendment to end birthright citizenship.


    I’ve no idea what 1&2;are and I’m guessing 3 is gay marriage ban. 4 is to prevent children of “illegals” born in the USA from getting citizenship automatically.

  4. An amendment to end birthright citizenship I could support, but everything else about him? Fuck no!

    I’m with you Les. If that ass gets elected, I’m out of here.

  5. 16th Amendment

    The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

    Reading the background on wiki appears that before the 16th the amount of federal tax collected had to be in the ratio of the populations. So a state of 2m people had a tax burden of twice that of 1m.

    If that is the case then I can see the point of the amendment.  If the smaller state had an average income per head of say $20k, and the larger $10k, the relative burden would be greater on the larger, yet poorer state- ie if the tax burden was $1bn per 1m people then each state stumps up $1000 pp- 10% of income in the large poor state, but only 5% of the income of the small rich state.- Arkansas would have to find over twice the money of Rhode Island.

    The 16th allows tax on basis of income by removing this block.  In such cases- a so called ‘flat tax’ the rich always profit, as while they pay more money, and the same proportion, as the poor, the difference in disposable income favours the rich- a much smaller proportion of the Rich income goes on essentials, especially on fixed price goods- you can buy Premium bread, rather than own brand, but the price of fuel, newspapers etc are fixed.

    Is Huckerbee freindly to the rich by any chance? Just a wild guess LOL

    The Human Life one is obviously anti abortion.

  6. I’d like it if taxes were based on something like an exponential curve, rather than being flat rate, or at best stepped – because tax bands, although a little fairer, are still like lots of flat levels with differences in fairness at the 2 extreemes of a band. We could just have one mathematical curve for a certain tax and it’d be so much simpler, and everyone would be under the same rules

  7. Is it wrong anytime I hear someone talk about rewriting the constitution that I just shut down and quit taking them seriously.  Especially when they want to use their religion as a wedge to split open the constitution and add their own slant to it. 

    Trying to back door religious ideals into this nations constitution sounds god damned terrifying.

    If ignorance is bliss and patience is a virtue you’ll probably be one happy little fundie.

  8. True Republicans Barry Goldwater and Teddy Roosevelt warned us about injecting religion into American politics. After the decimation of our party by W and Lott and Delay and the rest of the Southern Republicans, if Huckabee is the nominee I fear they’ll be no more GOP north of the Mason-Dixon. The last Republican in NY, please shut out the lights.

  9. Lostalaska: Is it wrong anytime I hear someone talk about rewriting the constitution that I just shut down and quit taking them seriously

    I think the trend is strong enough that it’s almost a warning sign that when someone says they want to change the constitution that they’re going to suggest something crackpot, but in seriousness there may be sensible modifications to make the thing fairer and up to date, that would otherwise be dismissed.

    Sticking with what it is prevents good and bad changes even if majority public opinion is against the pre-existing good out of silliness. It just depends how vulnerable you think the constitution is to bad change if you did open it up to change. Can’t hurt to hear people out, so long as you’re sensible yourself, but the problem is that everyone will claim to be the best judge with the most sensible idea, so you cannot necessarily trust who gets appointed to the panel that decides.

  10. regarding moving to another country – there are really two options worth some deep thought.

    Move to another country as the policy takes a turn for the worse: possibly better for your personal welfare, and offers a new dynamic into the political system – lose lots of citizens when you screw up bad.

    On the other hand, moving kills any other power you might have in government, and, if the crap that is passing through the USA is as infectious as Dawkins thinks it is, leaving the country to utter religious abandon – which might cause a lot more harm than good.

    Principally speaking, I like to think we should fight the good fight. However, leaving seems like a much simpler way to do it. Canada could sure use the population growth right now (we’re still caught in the post-baby-boom vaccuum, though we’re managing okay for now).

  11. Today was a scary day for many reasons.  I think the moving crack was is in regards to “loosing the good fight” and where to go afterwards.  Canada is looking more and more appealing every day.

  12. Kamina asks…

    I’m terrified of my government. Is that how I’m supposed to feel?

    There’s more than a few people in the government that I’m sure where hoping that’s how you’d feel.

  13. Bahamat: It just depends how vulnerable you think the constitution is to bad change if you did open it up to change.

    The problem as I see it is that more often than not the people that want to make changes to the constitution are the same ones that seem more focused on pushing their “followers” morals on society and less interested in societies opinion as a whole.  Of course the issue is once something does go into the constitution it’s even more difficult to remove.  The saving grace is that it is also nearly impossible to change the constitution, thank god (irony, no?)

    I’m also just an untrusting bastard.  There are certain overly used phrases that politicians dip into anytime they want the voters to do as they’re told and not look at the finer points of something.  We’ve all heard the phrases; To protect our nations children (i.e. censorship in place of good parenting), allowing the terrorists to win (i.e. we’re gonna need to take away a few of your precious freedoms), or the good ‘ole fashoned “Anyone that considers themselves an American should… (insert crazy talk here).

  14. We would need to make sure that the people who ultimately decide whether and what it changes, that their perception isn’t warped and their decision is logical and fair. But the public would not approve a neutral, fair, person to judge that

    Certain tactics do put me off polititions too, particularly negative campaigning

  15. Yup, and what scares me more is that Evangelicals actually think Huckabee is a moderate.

    Well, yeah. He hasn’t put his support behind the following has he?

    1) The “Stone everyone who doesn’t agree with us” amendment would probably have some trouble getting ratified by the proper number of states, though leading Evangelicals believe it would pass Congress easily enough.

    2) The “Put a hole in the earlobe of your manservant and make him serve you for life” amendment. Some believe it’s because the War of Northern Aggression is still too fresh in the peoples’ minds, but the truth is, it would support those damn piercing fetishists and send the wrong message to kids.

    3) Rapture tax – 10% tax on anyone who decides to not accept Jesus Christ, thus not going to church on Sunday and tithing 10% of their income.  Revenues from the Rapture Tax would be put into Faith Based Initiatives.  However, leaders in the Evangelical community believe it is more Huckabee doesn’t believe he could get the Rapture Tax through Congress, so they might have to start a “phone-your-congressman” campaign to get it started.

    4) Fixing those pesky biology, chemistry, geology, history, mathematics, physics, astronomy, philosophy, government and economics courses in high schools. Due to damn Dover PA ruling about Creati…er Intelligent Design, this will probably take a Supreme Court ruling to over-ride the federal court ruling. Huckabee would probably support it, but until he can get some fresh believers on the bench, this should probably take a back seat for now, and he’s agreed to not speak about it.

    I’m sure there’s a bunch more, but those seem to be the biggest gripes they have with ol’ Huck.

  16. While the optimist in me wants very much to believe that Huckabee stands no chance of taking the swing states (we all know he’ll be the South’s choice, should he make it that far in the election), I can’t quiet my nagging fear that this country is truly stupid enough to elect a man like Huckabee to the executive branch. Should that come to pass, the EU will acquire at least one additional citizen for a few years.

  17. It’s not so easy to pass an amendment to the Constitution.  First, it has to be passed by 2/3 of both the House and the Senate.  THEN it has to be passed by 3/4 of the states.

    I remember when the Equal Rights Amendment was under review.  It couldn’t get passed by the states, largely because of conservative opposition.  And that was a more egalitarian amendment than the ones proposed by the Huckster.


  18. And the way Congress is pandering to the current president you still aren’t scared by this? Has Bush had trouble getting a single issue passed? I’m having trouble thinking of anything he hasn’t been able to push through.

  19. Actually all that’s needed is for president Huckabee to appoint enough judges to make it say whatever he wants.  The actual words aren’t that much of a barrier.

    We’re already quite some ways down that road.

  20. It might sound odd, but perhaps this is in some ways what we need, that the public makes the mistake of allowing and supporting people like Huckabee so that they experience first hand what it’d be like to live under oppressive/unfair conditions, so that they will rebel against it.

    Innocents will suffer from the mistake too, and it will take longer for the culprits to feel it themselves, but maybe a little suffering is the only way to break willful ignorance, ultimately to force people to look for another way

  21. It might sound odd, but perhaps this is in some ways what we need, that the public makes the mistake of allowing and supporting people like Huckabee so that they experience first hand what it’d be like to live under oppressive/unfair conditions, so that they will rebel against it.

    One word: Scapegoat.

    If the human race hasn’t learned the lesson after thousands of years of suffering under theocracy in various forms, do you really think anything will be learned from another one?  Especially one that will have unprecedented power and tools to control the lives of those he rules over?  Suffering rarely breaks willful ignorance.  What it does do is give those causing the suffering the opportunity to turn that ignorance in whatever direction they want. The ignorant masses willingly believe whatever they are told. 

    For an example, see the percentage of US citizens that believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US.

    A stupid, fearful population is very easy to control.  Huckabee represents a massive shift toward ignorance, and fear mongering is just par for the course for the US government.

  22. Bahamat- Britain already has a graduated tax system.

    Lostalaska- Yep, no more amendments to the constitution, and get rid of all the ones you already have.

  23. BB- I don’t expect the entire human race to learn, especially when death + new life keeps pressing the reset button, but on an individual scale, if someone suffers enough they will see very plainly what caused it, and may rebel against it. Push people too far and they won’t want to obey the dictators orders or ideas anymore, they’d hate him and would only obey through fear or a feeling of compulsion, and it’d be with resentment. The public would suffer far more than the one in power, but the public will probably be more emotionally understanding people for it, and those who they affect will have an easier time. If you want to put the public off an idea, like as what happened with fascism or communism, show people how brutal it can be.

    LH- But tax is still banded, and the rules are different between bands. There is a sudden change in fairness when someone changes band, it’s like a staircase has lots of flat levels with sudden jumps between. Graduated tax is fairer than flat rate, but as is it’s not as smooth as it could be and rate doesn’t vary with the penny

  24. Graduated tax is fairer than flat rate, but as is it’s not smooth and rate doesn’t vary with the penny

    Even though it would be relatively trivial to come up with an algorithm for nearly perfect smoovitude.  And we should do that.  As it is, many people get a $100 raise and end up paying an extra $200 in taxes, which is just silly.

  25. “Fixing those pesky biology, chemistry, geology, history, mathematics, physics, astronomy, philosophy, government and economics courses in high schools.”

    And then we’ve gotta bring back Home Ec and Stenography for the girls.  Girls only need some secretarial skills, to give them something to do until they meet the right man, and fulfill their biblical role serving their husbands and raising their children. They’re crowding the boys out of the classes they need to be good breadwinners so that the little woman can stay home to raise the children, and not have to worry her little head about work and money and that sort of thing.

  26. As it is, many people get a $100 raise and end up paying an extra $200 in taxes, which is just silly

    Not here. Boy your system really needs fixing.

    In the UK (VERY rounded figs to give the idea, make the maths easier)
    0-£5k at 0%
    £5k-35K @20%
    £35k+ @ 40%

    but only of the income in that band
    ie £34k
    £5,000 at 0% = 0
    £34k-5k =£29k @ 20% = £5800 (ie subtract the £5k band)

    £5,000 at 0% = 0
    £35k-5k =£30k @ 20% = £6000
    remaining £1000 at 40% = £400

    Total £6400, the extra £600 is from the extra £2k they get.

    Even if your right on £35k, and get a £100 pay rise, you only pay the 40% on £100, not everything.

    Only an idiot of a government would run it different, or as you say, pay rises could penalise you.

  27. Only an idiot of a government would run it different, or as you say, pay rises could penalise you.

    lol.. forgive me for twisting tails, here, but versus a flat tax (or no tax at all, not to say both aren’t wierd/absurd) aren’t you already doing that? Punishing people who earn higher incomes by taxing them more?

  28. versus a flat tax (or no tax at all, not to say both aren’t wierd/absurd) aren’t you already doing that? Punishing people who earn higher incomes by taxing them more?

    Realistically no, since 40% of $100,000 is less of a burden for that person than 40% of $10,000 is to that person.  Given, having to pay 40k out of 100k would suck, but having only 6k out of 10k in take home pay would not just suck, you couldn’t really live off it.  That’s not to say that anyone could live off $10k nowdays, but the flat tax is definitely less fair to the poor than a graded tax is to the rich.

  29. reminds me of a software keynote a year or so back from a developer at Google.

    You can’t please everyone – instead, aim to displease everyone equally.

  30. lol.. forgive me for twisting tails, here, but versus a flat tax (or no tax at all, not to say
    both aren’t wierd/absurd) aren’t you already doing that? Punishing people who earn higher incomes by taxing them more?

    Well flat-taxers certainly see it that way, but I’m talking about the perverse “steps” that our tax system sometimes produces where a small raise bumps the taxpayer into a higher bracket, and the difference in taxes exceeds the amount of the raise.  The progressiveness of our tax system (which i do support) moves in unnecessarily large steps instead of a smooth progression.

  31. I can’t complain too much, but the progression could be smoother.  For two years I worked a part-time side job to make ends meet.  My income was about $3500 higher for those two years, and it cost me almost $1000 each year in higher taxes.  I went from below the “poverty line” to barely above it, and it came as a bit of a surprise that my tax burden had doubled.  I couldn’t buy a decent used car, get a decent apartment, or even think about having a child(or a pet, or an investment plan, or an unexpected illness)with the extra $3500.  But I sure did feel the crunch when I was filing my tax return.
    And then I look at where that money goes…
    but that’s another rant.

  32. Wait, wait, wait just a goddamned minute here.  What just happened? 
    After reading the main post, and then weaving my way through 34 comments, I ended up leaving a meek bit of personal commentary about the imperfect nature of the American tax system.  Luckily, after submitting my comment I was redirected to the top of the page!
    There is a fucking lunatic running for president on a platform that even well-known wingnuts have been afraid to endorse!  And he isn’t being laughed out of the debates!
    I don’t care about the fact that his ideas will fail this time around; it’s all about testing the deep waters of ignorance.  The closer he gets to acceptance on these grounds, the easier it will be to “normalize” such notions next time around.  And yes, when dealing in lunatic politics, the slope really is slippery!  How many more election cycles until christian amendments to the constitution are considered inevitable instead of unlikely? 
    I could draw some parallels to the last several decades in a few well-known middle-eastern countries, but the “conservatives” wouldn’t get it, and the “liberals” would accuse me of muslim-bashing.
    The rational community has to respond to this.  This is insanity, the one area where I am not willing to fight fire with fire.  I’m too young to be casing clock towers.

  33. I’d like to second the sentiments expressed in Neil’s most recent comment. The fact that Mike Huckabee has not been relegated to the status of “crank” by a majority of Americans—the fact that he is even still in the race—indicates just how low we as a nation have sunk.

    Me, I’ll be brushing up on my rudimentary knowledge of Italian…just ‘cuz. Though I really should be learning Dutch, because let’s face it, Amsterdam is the greatest place on Earth.  smile

  34. Not to decry the wonderfulness of Amsterdam, Sadie, but for a Californian the winters there are pretty dismal, with only about four hours of daylight and overcast…  Believe me, I lived there one winter.

    Of course, there are compensations… LOL

  35. I’m trying to work out why only 4 hours a day- a little exageration possibly? (Sadie- FYI today’s sunrise/sunset in the South of England is 8am to 4.10pm – about the same as Edmonton in Canada (same Lat))

    To keep the Thread Nazis happy- Huckabee bad blah blah, seperation on church and state blah blah.

    Yes the rich pay more than the poor, but then their disposable is much more- like I said before many costs are fixed- petrol, MacDonalds etc.  There is a basic income that you must have to buy the essentials.  More than that lets you get luxuries.  The rich can also invest surplus income, generating more income.  More steps are fairer, but seen as making the system more complicated.  Guess who argues that simplifing the tax system is better because everyone can understand it.  In the words of Sam Vimes- “Follow the money”.

    Interesting comment on BBC radio- policies do not seem to be a major concern amoung voters- as far as I can tell its beauty and soundbite.

  36. Okay, Hussar, that was a bit exaggerated.  I looked it up, and Amsterdam, at 52° North (a couple degrees south of Edinburgh), has a bit more than seven hours of what they jocularly refer to as “daylight” in the winter.  But it seemed pretty dismal to me, the three months I spent there.  It’s not much better here in Vienna, at 48° North, especially if the south windows in your apartment just face across the courtyard.

    But we’re getting a new apartment, hoorah! with windows and a balcony to the south!  Maybe we’ll be able to grow lemons!

  37. Okay, Hussar, that was a bit exaggerated

    Does I was right song and dance.

    I forget how far north Europe is.  Southern Spain is 36 North- Thats approximately the Virgina/North Carolina border.  New York is a few miles south of Rome, and LA is down with Lebanon.

    Course the upside is longer summer days.  I remember an interview with a rep from the Icelandic tourist board, saying how German Tourists complain about the fact they can’t get to sleep, because the sun is still up!  I think I would happily live in Vienna, South facing windows on a courtyard and all.

    Heard on the Radio this morning Fred the Actor was calling another Rep (poss Huckabee or Romney) a LIBERAL.

  38. Neil, thread drift is a fact of life, as is the fun of getting back to the topic – yeah!  The crazier each one gets, the saner the crazy ones between them and sanity appear to be to the vast numbers of American Idol watching, global warming denying, pastoral politics pursuing walking advertising demographics who make up the bulk of voters.

  39. No worries, and no thread nazi here!  I wasn’t trying to take anyone to task(except maybe myself), I was just truly surprised at how quickly the subject changed into something more comfortably sane. 
    The press has been taking it real easy on this nutter.  Any journalist could, with a minimum of effort, expose a book’s worth of insanity straight from Huck’s mouth, and at least ask some pointed questions about his theocratic ambitions.  Instead we get some perverted Fox-style fair and balancing act, where any joker who can sway a few loonies gets automatic respect and positive coverage. As long as
    he’s attatched to one of the two parties that get covered, of course.  If this asshole were an independent, we could have safely laughed his ass back to the pulpit by now. 
    He has a serious race going, on a platform that USED to keep people out of consideration.  This stuff was the domain of the Pat Robertsons and the Jerry Falwells, now it is becoming mainstream.  The republican drift to the right has done enough damage over the last two decades or so by appealing to divine authority and human prejudice-now they don’t even feel the need to hide their dishonest tactics or imperial ambitions.
    When we do take the final crap on reason by electing our first American Ayatollah, how long before we start hearing about the “divine right of presidents” or some such?  How many men of faith does it take to tear down the standards of a secular government to the point where the damage is permanent?

  40. Neil- not enough content about the thread title in your last post, so under the US Constitution (the bits they don’t admit to) you have to have your bare buttocks pelted with lightly salted asparagus. Don’t blame me, blame John Hancock- he put it in, but his writing was too big to fit in the essential clause “if your name is Thomas Jefferson.”

    The problem is that US Primaries are notorious for candidates drifting to the extremes to capture the ‘Core vote’.  They usually move back to the centre to catch the floaters.  The problem is of course if the candidate doesn’t do this.  It makes sense for the other party to drift that way to to pick up those left behind.

  41. aren’t you already doing that? Punishing people who earn higher incomes by taxing them more?

    I think the difference is that with the UK, if someone enters a new, higher band, the higher rate only applies to what’s above the minimum of that band – so different sections of your income is taxed at different rates, rather than the whole of it.

    LH – Notice the graduated system is like lots of flat lax levels – one flat tax rate for those in a certain range, another flat tax rate for those in another range – it’d be fairer to have a slope than a staircase

  42. Bare buttocks pelted with lightly salted asparagus?  Hmmm…I knew that our founding fathers were men of vision, but the prescience of this insight amazes me.  The couldn’t have known it, but that is the very thing that would put me in my place.  Any mention of licorice whippings for petty offenses, or allowing females to duel by way of jello wrestling?

    A little less fat in one’s diet reduces the chance of floaters.

    This information is accurate and useful.  It would be even more useful if posted on the bathroom door of every Greyhound bus in the fleet.  Those floaters can get dangerous if the driver has to slam on the brakes.

    As far as Fuckabee goes, I know that candidates do a lot of grandstanding and say lots of silly things to get noticed, but it is still a distressing thing to see such anti-constitutional claptrap getting the spotlight.  I’m still waiting for Chuck Barris to ring the gong and the audience to break out in derisive laughter; the longer it goes on, the more I doubt that any such moment is coming.  I don’t care how likeable or mild mannered Huckabee is, he seems to honestly believe that there is a pressing need for more God in our politics, when it’s already so God-soaked you can hardly sense any other issues except the reek of the pious.

    He might swing back to center a bit if he gets the nomination, but it would take one hell of a swing to land him anywhere near the center. 
    I think his only change would likely be AWAY from center and his “christian charity” social views, so as to line up more closely with the fiscal conservatives of his party.  In my opinion, the only thing keeping him from greater popularity among repubs is his seeming friendliness.  The war hawks, corporate interests, and law & order fanatics probably don’t think he’s tough enough to kill all the people who need killing.  If he can get over his christian conscience and take the Republican mantra of “might makes right” to heart, he might just prove to be the guy for the job.

  43. The frightening thing about US Politics is that because Religeon is so wide spread every one has to been seen to be promoting it, to avoid being labeled ‘anti american’.  ‘Atheist’ is a pointless insult in Britain.

    And DoF- if you continue to lower the tone we will let Neil loose on you with a tin of peaches in syrup.  He sounds a creative lad…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.