If there’s any chance to head off a Huckabee disaster, it may be that Rush is the answer.

RUSH: All right, ladies and gentlemen, I’m going to take the gloves off here for just a second. Welcome back, by the way, to the Rush Limbaugh program and the EIB Network. We’re getting a lot of people calling here, claiming to speak for all evangelicals. Even Huckabee himself said on Fox yesterday that he did not get all of the evangelical vote in Iowa. It is not true to say that the evangelical vote in this country is monolithic and in total support of Mike Huckabee. If you want to call and speak for yourself, feel free to do so. Most of the pro-life groups out there, by the way, not groups of religious people, but most of the pro-life groups happen to be supporting Fred Thompson. In another thing, we had a guy, Eric from North Carolina, who called and said and that the Home School Legal Defense Association endorsed Huckabee. That’s not true. One of their top dogs did, a guy named Michael Farris, but the association did not. You can go through their website and you will find a lot of critical articles on Huckabee, re: home schooling. They had a press release saying that Farris’ endorsement is not an endorsement from them. This is a guy that accused me of deceiving people. You can call here, you can say what you want, but be very careful, because I am an encyclopedia. If you’re going to start making claims here, we’re going to find out about it.

He then proceeds to take them to school.

There’s still time to educate the evangelical (true) conservative voters in South Carolina, and here’s hoping that a combination of Rush and an energized Fred can head him off at the pass in the next few days.

[Late evening update]

Fred is South Carolina bound. Send some money, if you believe in the cause, and can afford it.

That’s the siren on Drudge (no permalink, as usual):

Facing a double-digit defeat in New Hampshire, a sudden collapse in national polls and an expected fund-raising drought, Senator Hillary Clinton is preparing for a tough decision: Does she get out of the race? And when?!

“She can’t take multiple double-digit losses in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada,” laments one top campaign insider. “If she gets too badly embarrassed, it will really harm her. She doesn’t want the Clinton brand to be damaged with back-to-back-to-back defeats.”

It seems a little premature to me. Of course, it wouldn’t be the first time a Clinton pulled out early.

[Update late morning]

Wow. Dana Milbank sure isn’t a Hillary fan.

[Another update before noon]

Looks like Bill Richardson has put all his chips on Obama:

“The preternaturally jolly McAuliffe is a good man to have spinning for you in a pinch. But his good cheer dimmed when I asked him about Bill Richardson, who appears to have made an 11th-hour deal to throw his supporters to Obama. “How many times did [Clinton] appoint him?” McAuliffe marveled. “Two? U.N. Ambassador and Energy Secretary?” He looked at me, half-glaring, awaiting confirmation. “I don’t know,” I joked, “but who’s counting?” “I am,” McAuliffe said firmly”

Joe Monahan this morning also cites current ABC newsman (and former Clintonista) George Stephanopolous to the same effect — that Richardson has burned whatever bridge he may have had with the Clintons — and Monahan suggests that, for Richardson, New Mexico may end up being the Land of Entrapment.

He might want to start wearing a helmet that can handle flying ashtrays.

[Afternoon update]

Brian Cherry has some pretty tart comments about the situation:

Iowa Democrat voters discarded Hillary like a healthy body rejecting a kidney transplant from a baboon. This was in a microcosm what can happen when Hillary is running in the general election against whoever the Republican

Daniel Pipes writes that he was too raised (sort of) as a Muslim. And that means that his life is at risk not just because he’s a presidential candidate, but also because he’s a high-profile heretic, with a death sentence over his head, based on the teachings of his former religion. Not that it’s a reason not to vote for him in itself, but this strikes me as a much more interesting religious problem than either Romney or Huckabee have.

Of course, it’s also interesting that, in all its Obama worship, the MSM continues to try to whitewash this away, accusing Pipes of spreading “falsehoods.”

[Update a few minutes later]

Heh: “…isn’t it a bit odd that the leading candidate for ‘change’ is a Chicago Democrat?”

Speaking of Chicago, if it is perceived that Hillary steals the nomination from him now, via super delegates and the like, expect Denver to make the events from four decades ago in that city look like a matronly tea party.

Has any southern candidate done well in New Hampshire? Bill Clinton came in second, despite his spin at the time about the “comeback kid.”

I ask because I’m a little surprised at the antipathy expressed by Frank Luntz’ focus group to Fred Thompson.

…that I wish that the media would ask, but probably won’t. It would separate the wheat from the chafe.

“Senator, Governor, whatever… Do you believe that we are at war with an enemy with whom no negotiation is possible?”