In One Speech, Mike Huckabee Proves How Ignorant Conservatives Are About Our Constitution (Video)

mike-huckabee-1Believe it or not, there was a time where I didn’t think Mike Huckabee was that bad of a guy.  Granted I didn’t know a whole lot about him back then, but the few times I saw him give an interview he seemed fairly level headed, and what he said didn’t sound like something uttered by someone who might possibly belong in a mental institution.

Boy, was I wrong.

In the last few years Huckabee has proven himself to be every bit as batshit crazy as most far right conservatives.

Take his recent comments at the 2014 March for Marriage in Washington D.C. where he put on full display the fact that he doesn’t know a damn thing about our Constitution or what constitutes freedom.

“Nothing threatens your personal liberty more than the notion that you would bow your knee to the court system apart from the ultimate rule of the Constitution,” he said. “And all of the branches of government, all of which are not there to tell you what you cannot do, but to guarantee the freedoms that you are always empowered to have.”

“We are under an obligation to obey God and the law, and if necessary, to defy an institution that is out of control,” he continued.

Seriously?  These are the kinds of comments he wants to make at a march aimed at denying equal rights for millions of gay Americans as they’re rightfully owed per our Constitution?  He wants to talk about liberty while seeking to deny millions of Americans equal rights?

Our Supreme Court, which is set up by our Constitution, more or less struck down DOMA, leaving it in the hands of the states.  And it just so happens that practically every state where bans on same-sex marriage have been challenged, the courts within those states have overturned these bans.

You know why?  Because these bans violate our First Amendment rights to freedom of religion.  

This is not rocket science.

But it gets worse.  Huckabee then tried to channel Martin Luther King Jr. to support his ignorance.

“One may well ask, ‘How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?’” Huckabee quoted from writings of Dr. King. “The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws: there are just laws, and there are unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘An unjust law is no law at all.’”

Huckabee continued to read from King’s letter, “We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was ‘legal’ and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was ‘illegal.’ It was ‘illegal’ to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. But I am sure that if I had lived in Germany during that time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal.”

“I wish I had penned those words,” Huckabee said. “But they were penned by someone who understood freedom, and understood that there was a time to stand up against law when it has become unjust. Those are the words that were penned in 1954 by Martin Luther King Jr. in his letter from the Birmingham Jail.”

Let’s get out of the way that Huckabee’s position, and usage of King’s remarks, make absolutely no sense.  Right now what we have are laws against giving equal rights to homosexuals such as the Nazis had laws against helping Jews.

What we’re seeing now are these ignorant laws being overturned and homosexual Americans finally being given their equal rights to marry whomever they love.

King was talking about the laws we had in this country that supported segregation, disenfranchised African Americans and denied millions their Constitutional rights.

And ironically many of those who supported segregation and horrific inequality for African Americans used the Bible to justify their ignorance.

Just like Mike Huckabee and his fellow conservatives are doing now.  

I don’t get how ignorant someone has to be to stand there, going on and on about freedom and liberty – while supporting laws that deny millions of Americans basic freedoms and liberties.

It makes absolutely no sense, and goes to show just how little about our Constitution conservatives like Mike Huckabee actually understand.

Watch his comments below:

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • Gary Menten

    Dear Mike,

    The primary difference between the Constitution and God is that the Constitution can be proven to exist. Everyone in the US is legal under obligation to obey it. No one is under legal obligation to obey God.

    The primary purpose of the Supreme Court is to make sure all laws written in the United States…anywhere in the United States conform to the Constitution. The Founding Fathers created it precisely because they knew that if they didn’t, there would be sh_theads like you who would want laws that make a mockery of the Constitution.

    • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

      remember to ask any and all regressive religious scum this question:
      can YOUR “god” fully cure an amputee?

  • strayaway

    “our Constitution conservatives like Mike Huckabee”

    Don’t be ridiculous. Rev. Mike Huckabee is a status quo big government Republican with a strong religious bent. For instance, in 2008 presidential debate, Huckabee argued in favor of continuing the Iraq War for the sake of our national honor. Ron Paul cut him down by asking Huckabee how many more Americans he would allow die for the sake of national ‘honor’. Ron Paul is the marker for constitutional conservative. Huckabee falls short. A constitutional conservative wouldn’t keep or even send our troops into war without a declaration from Congress or at least a Letter of Marque.

    • Sandy Greer

      >Ron Paul is the marker for constitutional conservative.

      Agree, absolutely. Surely, he’s one of those ‘prophets’ we spoke of recently, who cried into the wilderness – on any number of issues. Though, when it comes to standing squarely on the Constitution of olde – even he had his faults:

      http://www DOT politifact DOT

      ^^^Which is just about the best argument can be made for seeing a Living Constitution – rather than being a Strict Constructionist. Which, again, was yet another convo we had, some time back. 😉

      • strayaway

        The standard was that “Dr. Paul NEVER votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.”

        To prove that he did, these were the best examples that politifact could come up with. “1) he voted to authorize the continuing operation of NASA. 2) to celebrate Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday on the third Monday in January.
        3) he voted to change federal law governing organ transplants to make it easier for people to receive donated kidneys. 4)He voted to designate the Ellis Island Library as the “Bob Hope Memorial Library.” 5) (He) voted to change federal law so the American flag would be displayed on Father’s Day.”

        1) NASA has a defense component. The US government is supposed to provide for the common defense although NASA is not mentioned by name.
        2) I’m surprised. After all, Paul refused to vote to have commemorative coin minted in honor of Reagan. Where did Paul’s soft spot for MLK come from?
        3) He voted to change something. Maybe he thought the change involved less government and there was no option except to replace the original. I don’t know the details.
        4) Article 1, Section 7 does authorize Congress to authorize needful buildings. Congress can make laws necessary and proper for carrying into Execution. Presumably that includes the ability to name buildings, hire an architect, etc. 5) There is nothing in the Constitution about flags. If this is about flying flags in front of government building, Congress can make laws necessary and proper for carrying into Execution.

        So, if such trivial matters, most of which are more or less powers already allowed or required of Congress, is your definition of a living Constitution Sandy, then I agree with you about your definition of a ‘living Constitution”. Ron Paul did get a little wild and crazy about specifying a day to celebrate MLK day though. I will even vote for someone who had ten such examples over 23 years in Congress.

        Back to Huckabee; the guy is a religious neocon and not even in the same ballpark as Ron Paul.

      • Sandy Greer

        Exactly. The ‘standard’ was set by Ron Paul himself – his own words; his own website. How else should we (or Politifact, or anyone else) judge his ‘standards’ – than by his own words?

        I reckon even you try to hold people to their word. Mostly.

        Save for your Man, of course – who is to be Defended (with excuses, hah!) against an Onslaught by the Hordes. You’re funny, LOL

        Careful you don’t go all Liberal on us, now (Living
        Constitution) Or they’ll be calling you a RINO, soon enough.

        But your little secret is safe with me, strayaway. You have my word on it. ;D

    • 1EdMeadows83

      Oops, wrong century, stray!

  • lindylou

    He has been taking Politamush lessons from Sarah Palin.

  • Eg Kbbs

    So what does the Huck-ster have to say about the Nixon / Reagan / Bush / Bush unitary executive where “if the president does it, then it is legal” ?

    And as this is so obviously opposed to what he says quoted in this article, did he speak out against them at the time ?

  • Grumpmaster_Zz

    Actually, the gay marriage bans are being overturned because they violate the XIVth Amendment, (No State shall deny) Equal Protection of the Law. Conservatives really hate the XIVth Amendment.

  • rossbro

    Hucklebuck is as big a jerk as all the rest of the Republican Presidential Candidates. Maybe worse, since he tries to wrap himself in Religion and Patriotism. At least. in his mind.

  • katherine norton malek

    Looks like GOD was trying to shut him the eff up by putting a frog in his throat. The so-called “moral law” he self righteously speaks of, HE believes should protect the unborn zygotes & fetuses but put to death a criminal convicted under man’s laws & strip away safety nets for the brought to term babies & children; food stamps, WIC program, Head Start…. WTF??!!!

  • ExRadioGuy15

    No, no, no, no, no, no….DO NOT take this as a sign that they’re ignorant…Cons are not ignorant…THEY KNOW that they’re misinterpreting/misapplying the Constitution (and the Bible, for that matter)…that’s the reason why I can (and do) correctly call them psychopaths. Psychopaths are highly intelligent and use that intelligence not only to hide their mental defects, but also to use against you with their propaganda and arguments. The REAL idiots of the GOP are the Teahadists (Teaidjits) and the Firebaggers (Libertarians)…in fact, the latter two groups get their talking points from the Cons…please, people: remember that the Cons are NOT ignorant…they’re PSYCHOPATHS! SSMDH They WANT you to think that they’re ignorant…..

  • 1EdMeadows83

    ““We are under an obligation to obey God and the law” That is not true! We are under NO obligation to obey God. If he’s trying to say that God is implicit in the constitution he is dangerously mistaken. God was explicitly left out of the constitution. The only thing remotely connected to God is the first amendment, which says the government has no business in trying to establish a religion. I personally think all religion should be outlawed but that’s just me.