Received this in an email and thought I would pass it on. It will be interesting to see if he can stick to it throughout the primary and then the general election.....

 

 

 

Yesterday, I flew to Little Rock to cut three new television ads with our campaign team. The first "Our Values" will air in Iowa and discusses my unwavering commitment towards a Human Life Amendment. The second ad which will air exclusively in New Hampshire called "Tax Cuts Matter" discusses the first broad based tax cut that I passed in Arkansas' history. You can view both ads here.

 

The third ad was a negative attack against Governor Romney. We prepared it, sent the ad to the television stations here in Iowa, and it was supposed to start running at noon today. This morning, I ordered my staff to pull the ad; I told them I do not want it to be run. If it was run at all, it would be until the stations pulled it off their schedules. And we are now committed, from now through the rest of the caucuses, that we will run only the a ds that talk about why I should be president, and not why Mitt Romney should not.

 

Back in October when I stood in Washington, DC before the Values Voter Summit delivering a speech to the attendees I reminded them that "we stand for some things, we believe in some things..." We do indeed:

 

I believe in the Human Life Amendment and will work tirelessly for it's passage.

 

I believe the FairTax is the best way to unleash our economy in the 21st century.

 

I believe and have always supported the passage of a federal constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

 

I believe we must secure our borders, end amnesty and end sanctuary cities.

 

I believe our country must be energy independent.

 

I believe that we are currently engaged in a world war. Radical Islamic fascists have declared war on our country and our way of life.

 

I believe in the Surge.

 

And I believe that Americans aren't interested in politics that divide us, they want their leaders to focus on what will lift them up and make things better.

 

I almost forgot that today in the face of the withering barrage of criticism we have endured over the last few weeks from my rivals. I say almost, because our negative ad won't run.

 

I know we believe in the same things. It is these things, these ideas, that have bound us together in this campaign for President. These ideas are why you first became interested in me and these ideas are why I am running for President. Let everyone know, that we are campaigning for these ideas and that we are working overtime to lift America up.

 

With deep gratitude,

Mike Huckabee

Huckabee made a fool of himself by holding a press conference to announce his decision not to run a negative TV spot. He is receiving some well deserved ridicule, such as the following example:

 

(2008-01-01) — To further demonstrate his commitment to a positive campaign strategy, Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee today showed reporters a Powerpoint presentation of opposition research that his staff has compiled against his top GOP rivals and announced he would not be using any of it in his effort to win his party’s nomination.

 

The revelations come just a day after Mr. Huckabee held a news conference to unveil to reporters an attack ad against Mitt Romney Mitt-Romney-MBA Sep-07 that his campaign will not broadcast in the waning hours before Thursday’s Iowa caucuses.

 

In today’s 47-minute narrated presentation, the former Arkansas governor revealed the findings of private investigators, as well as leaks from Democrat operatives, and innuendo “that we haven’t had time to confirm yet”, all of which Mr. Huckabee said “would never be released by his campaign, except to you people at this press conference, whom I have come to know and trust.”

 

more....Huckabee Unveils Dirt He Won't Use Against Rival

s

Scrappleface ^ | Scott Ott

IMO the more Huck talks the more he loses ground.

IMO the more Huck talks the more he loses ground.

 

Is that because he is suddenly less qualified or not willing/practiced at playing the major politically games that go on?

 

It seems his faith and the way he wants to do things might be standing firmly in the way of being a politician.

 

The founding fathers might have wanted to have a separation of church and state because they knew that a person truly convicted of his faith could never be elected cause he wouldn't play the political tricks.

I think the race is Huckabee's to lose.

Is that because he is suddenly less qualified or not willing/practiced at playing the major politically games that go on?

 

It seems his faith and the way he wants to do things might be standing firmly in the way of being a politician.

 

The founding fathers might have wanted to have a separation of church and state because they knew that a person truly convicted of his faith could never be elected cause he wouldn't play the political tricks.

If Huck decided to pull a negative ad, then he should have done so quietly. Calling a press conference to announce the decision and divulging the contents of the ad made him look silly and less than honest - and I like Huckabee.

If Huck decided to pull a negative ad, then he should have done so quietly. Calling a press conference to announce the decision and making the contents of the ad made him look silly and less than honest - and I like Huckabee.

 

His mistake was never putting the ad together. Once done and once purchased he had to address it or it would have been brought up in a political twist to make him look even worse, at some point in the future.

I think the race is Huckabee's to lose.

 

Playing not to lose, never works.

 

I prefer, it is Huckabee's to win.:thumb:

His mistake was never putting the ad together. Once done and once purchased he had to address it or it would have been brought up in a political twist to make him look even worse, at some point in the future.

All Huckabee had to do was pull the ad and not run it. The grandstanding was a blunder on his part.

All Huckabee had to do was pull the ad and not run it. The grandstanding was a blunder on his part.

 

Might be. He was going to look bad either way once he made the ad and purchased time.

Might be. He was going to look bad either way once he made the ad and purchased time.

I disagree. All he had to do was not run the ad. Had he been asked about the ad as the result of a leak, then he could have explained that he had decided that the ad was too negative for his campaign and then refused further comment. I don't see how doing so would have made him look bad and it certainly would not have opened him up to ridicule.

His mistake was never putting the ad together. Once done and once purchased he had to address it or it would have been brought up in a political twist to make him look even worse, at some point in the future.

 

One hundred percent false.

 

If he buried it without public discussion and it came up later, he then has the option to say, "Yes, we did that research and put that ad together, but I decided that discretion truly is the better part of valor. I will never address the contents of the ad and the ad itself will never see the light of day. We made a mistake stooping to that level and I'd like to apologize to my fellow Republicans for considering it."

 

Instead, his campaign comes up with a stunt which allows it to run a negative ad and publicize the claims in the negative ad without actually paying a dime to buy time for the negative ad, as noted in the press coverage of the event. From a Rovian point of view, it's brilliant. From the personal honor point of view, he has failed.

 

Think about it: He has his staff dig up and correlate all this negative allegations on his rivals, then he says he's not going to do anything to follow up on what campaign insiders call "the Huckabee dirt bag." At the same time, he releases "the Huckabee dirt bag" without trying to prove anything.

 

Seems to me that what he did was actually worse. Looks like the real Huckabee dirt bag is Huckabee himself --- just another shyster trying to earn our trust.

GO HUCKABEE!!

I disagree. All he had to do was not run the ad. Had he been asked about the ad as the result of a leak, then he could have explained that he had decided that the ad was too negative for his campaign and then refused further comment. I don't see how doing so would have made him look bad and it certainly would not have opened him up to ridicule.

 

 

Maybe he thought by allowing the ad to run, then pulling it would make him seem even more "good". It gets attention if it runs and he makes a big deal out of pulling it. He gains nothing if it's never run, or he doesn't make a big deal out of pulling it. Maybe he's more politician than man of faith? :sssh:

Playing not to lose, never works.

 

I prefer, it is Huckabee's to win.:thumb:

That's what I meant. Just an expression.