Huckabee sympathetic to Democrats
On Friday I discussed why many social conservatives find themselves unnerved by Mike Huckabee. Over the weekend Jeffrey Lord wrote an essay for The American Spectator describing how Huckabee's economic philosophy not only places his conservatism into question, but he uses the Leftist pejorative "Greed" to describe capitalism. In particular, Huckabee has referred to the conservative Club for Growth, the leading advocates for libertarian economics as "the Club for Greed." Why? The good folks at the Club have dared to criticize Huckabee's economic record:The Club is famous for delving into the records of GOP candidates for not just the presidency but other offices as well, carefully combing the fine print of their speeches, programs and votes as office-holder or candidate and matching them to the Reagan ideal. Mike Huckabee, it seems, has supported any number of taxes while governor, and the Club has inevitably zeroed in on his economic beliefs.
What disconcerts is Huckabee's gut level response. Instead of either defending his record or admitting to a mistake or challenging the views of the Club he said this: "The Club for Greed, I call them. They hate that. Oh, they hate it. And I enjoy giggin' them about it..."
Is Huckabee among those who believe that making a profit is tantamount to greed? I understand that many of my liberal friends subscribe to that erroneous line of thinking, but that is the very problem with Governor Huckabee. John Edwards-a man who made his living from suing people-uses class warfare rhetoric all the time referring to profits as greed. Al Gore referred to those who opposed his economic ideas in 2000 as "the forces of greed." Hillary wants to "take those oil company profits." Where does Hillary want to put them, in the federal treasury? If so, we can all rest assured that the price of gas will not go down since the feds will be the ones getting rich off of oil. To these Democrats, economic growth and opportunity equates to personal greed. Apparently, Mike Huckabee shares their view of economics as opposed to the conservative one.
A President Huckabee stands to have plenty of support for his programs-from Democrats. His lead opposition is likely to come from the very party that would have nominated him.
If you think conservatives rebelled over President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court because she was not seen as a serious conservative, you've seen nothing next to the reaction that would greet a President Huckabee as he abandoned Reaganomics in favor of some sort of Edwards-lite economic program.
Although I don't necessarily support Mitt Romney, he is right on one score-for the Republican nominee to be successful, he must have the support of social conservatives, economic conservatives, and what he calls "national security conservatives." Rudy Giuliani's attempt to cater to only one of these groups while completely disrespecting the other two will cost him the nomination-and so it should be with Huckabee. The Governor needs to explain if he believes in conservative economics or not-if he does he must explain what his past remarks meant in his mind, and if he does not he should explain to the Party faithful why it is that we should therefore give him the nomination.
Labels: Presidential Election
posted by Deacon David Oatney @ 8:21 AM
17 Comments:
First of all I'm a fiscal conservative. Mike Huckabee spent a lot of money in Arkansas for highways and bridges. If you ever travel Arkansas, they really needed it. Second of all, that's what government is supposed to do, spend on things that make our economy work, like roads. Greed is what I dislike, but corruption is killing us. I don't think Huckabee is corrupt. I think Huckabee is an honest man with a goal. He's gonna be picked apart by the corrupt.
Hi Dave,
I can remember discussing Huck with you almost a year ago and saying he's the first Republican who calls himself a Christian, who actually acts like one. With that in mind, he does indeed include the poor in his plans, and in an effort to see less abortions, he does indeed offer solutions for mothers who would otherwise abort.
Tell me why these are bad things?
If Republicans are going to continue to say this country AND government is founded on Judeo-Christian values, then we take care of the poor.
But somehow, a lot of Republicans want to contradict themselves when it comes to health care for a child and feeding the poor...then y'all say it's the churches job to do that.
But you can't have it both ways.
Huckabee is the first Republican to address these issues as a person of faith.
(*To anyone who doesn't know me, I don't support Huck for President...just defending a couple of good ideas he has for helping those less fortunate)
Sharon,
I think that's somewhat of a mis-statement.
First, virtually all of the foundation of Western society (America, Europe, etc.) is based on Judeo-Christian traditions and values. The United States is certainly not unique to that, although we (of course) put our own unique spin on it.
Second, the basic principles behind our code of laws is Judeo-Christian, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that our government is. Those are two different concepts. Our government is set up to protect the natural rights given to us by God; it was never intended to function like a church or to take on traditionally religious functions, such as charity.
I would imagine that the above is one (of the minor) reasons why the Establishment Clause was placed in the Bill of Rights.
Huckabee's positions aren't wrong, per se. They're good intentions, but as with many good ideas, the practical implementation on the federal level creates many problems.
And you know how they often say -- the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The federal government (and really, all levels of government) cannot be all things to all people, economically. And people, in general, are becoming increasingly less self-reliant and more demanding on the government to do just that. The more we feed into such beliefs, the worse it will be.
The ultimate answer to this is self- and community-reliance. In other words, helping yourself and your neighbor. The true power of choice isn't just making a choice -- it's making the right choice.
As for Huckabee's record as governor of Arkansas, I would of course say that it's more fiscally liberal than conservative. However, from a federalist perspective, I'm much more comfortable with that on a state level than the federal level.
If he was running for Governor of Ohio, I would probably find it somewhat easier to vote for him. But he's not; he's running for President.
By the way, did anyone notice the pompous, "I'm entitled" move that Huckabee made today?
Apparently, Huckabee made a very negative ad that he was going to run in Iowa, and he apparently did so over the weekend (while he was at the same time on Meet the Press crying about how Romney did the same thing to McCain).
But now, Huckabee has had a change of heart, announcing to much fanfare that he will not run the ad. He said that he didn't want to run anything that would make him need to take a shower afterword (i.e., make him feel dirty).
He spoke to Wolf Blitzer on CNN today about the ad.
One, the whole episode makes me wonder why he made the ad in the first place, if it was so awful. He would have had to approve the copy, and he certainly would have had to appear in it.
Two, this has got to be the most politically disingenuous thing I've ever seen. It's incredible as to the lengths Huckabee will go to appear "holier than thou"...and honestly, it gives great credence to those who say that Huckabee's Christmas ad was purposefully done with political motives in mind.
It's disgusting, really. He's trying to tell everyone how great he is and trying to show how much above the fray he can be. It's all a sham.
David, I don't think you're right about Huckabee at all. After this, all I can say about him is that he's a complete charlatan. An absolute fraud.
(And if reports about his little hunting trip last week are true, it appears he doesn't know the first thing about hunting safety, either. What fool shoots at a pheasant with a gaggle of reporters in the background, causing buckshot to fly over the heads of people...)
And one more thing...apparently, Huckabee wasn't TOO ashamed of the ad, because he showed it (for free) to reporters.
He probably figures that he'll get free press out of it, because reporters will obviously write stories about the content of the ad.
I wonder if such behavior is a violation of campaign finance laws. It would be an interesting avenue to look into.
I swear, if he gets the nomination, he is going to get absolutely destroyed by whoever the Democrats send up. Just absolutely emasculated. You can bank on that.
Matt--You're right about the ad. He came out and tried to take the moral high ground, and then he showed it to the press so they could air his negative commercial.
Scratch the good things I've said about him. He just had anti war protesters (peaceful protest on sidewalk) arrested.
Apparently he's for the 2nd amendment, but not the 1st. We don't need another President deciding for us which amendments "we the people" are entitled to.
Read http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/31/huckabee-has-anti-war-protesters-arrested/
Correction. He had 8 protesters arrested who were simply waiting in his campaign office to talk with him.
Nice to know if you want to talk with him and he doesn't like you he'll have you arrested.
That's way too scary for me.
Every candidate on both sides has hecklers, and at worst, they are removed from the event but not arrested.
Now 8 people who weren't heckling him...just wanted to ask him some questions about the war, were arrested.
Scary.
Gee Sharon, you don't have a right to interrogate or berate or even have an audience under the First Amendment. If Huckabee didn't want to talk to them and they wouldn't leave, they were trespassing. Trespassers are guilty of a crime. People guilty of a crime should be arrested. Right?
Like I've said elsewhere, populist rhetoric rubs me the wrong way, because the "populace" is often plain wrong. Nonetheless, I think the Club for Growth's activities in this primary have been suspect. But this is politics and Huckabee should be able to withstand the heat.
Sharon,
Wow. I hadn't heard about that, and I'm equally disturbed about the story.
And you know what? That's the problem. Because of our blogging, Renee and I follow the news all day, in as many ways as possible, and we had not heard of this. This story, as well as his hunting gaffe and surely others, are all being ignored by the MSM.
Even Huckabee's trumped up ad retraction isn't getting much play.
Now, if Fred Thompson had done all of this (and maybe Rudy Giuliani, too), these stories would be all over the place. Fred would be getting slammed from all angles.
Anyway, all of these things we're talking about here are precisely the reasons why I absolutely refuse to vote straight party-line in any election. It's why I choose to not let any singular issue(s), regardless of their importance, drive my vote.
Huckabee may hold some social views that I do, and in particular he and I agree that abortions should be ended in this country. However, while I view the abortion issue as very important, it simply cannot trump all these other concerns that exist about Huckabee. This is especially true when the Presidency is at stake.
Okay, Ned. Sure.
Sure, a candidate has a right to ignore whomever he wishes. But is it ethical? Who else is Huckabee going to ignore and/or have arrested?
And really, it's not very smart. As we've clearly seen in this campaign, appearance stands for a lot, and Huckabee looks like a complete ass for refusing to answer questions and having the protesters arrested. Even if they were "trespassing" (a claim I find very dubious), his behavior certainly isn't very Christian -- and that's very sad, coming at a time where he is trying to be so holier-than-thou and is trying to claim to be a true Christian leader.
And did it ever occur to you (or Huckabee) that having the ability to do something doesn't mean you should go ahead and do it?
It's also telling that Huckabee's spokespeople couldn't be reached for comment on this story. Heh. I wonder why.
One of the (many) things I don't like Huckabee is his Romney-esque slickness. He's got an excuse or reason for EVERYTHING. Absolutely nothing he ever does is his fault, whether it's idiotic things that he's said or non-conservative things he's done. Take (for instance) his constant taxing in Arkansas. That was either the fault of the roads for being so poor or the fault of the Supreme Court in Arkansas for making him do it. Bull. Is it too much for him to be a MAN? (And shooting small animals for votes doesn't count...)
Ned,
I can't really say it better than Matt did.
Huck had so many other options than to have them arrested. No one was remotely threatening to him or his staff.
Yes, one does has the right to have someone arrested who trespasses, (his office is open to the public--no sign saying no anti war people)but I don't want a President whose first instinct is to have someone arrested who simply disagrees with him.
What he did today might seem insignificant, but I think it speaks very loudly how he reacts to opposition.
Sharon,
I think the last month or so has shown, in many different ways, how unprepared Huckabee is to lead an entire country. Besides having people arrested today, the confusion within his campaign over that negative Romney ad calls into question just how competent an administration he could have. I don't much like Fox News, but their campaign correspondent Carl Cameron had some very pointed comments about that immediately after the ad was pulled.
As for those arrests, wouldn't you agree that it seems eerily similar to what President Bush would do in a similar situation? Maybe Huckabee is the real "Bush Lite" in this race.
And maybe it's just me, but his behavior is especially strange given how he thinks that President Bush has an "arrogant bunker mentality".
Matt,
Speaking of not acting very Christian . . . lighten up. I know that he's leading your candidate in the polls, but he's not evuhl. Of course he has explanations for everything. You lambasted (attempted to) him for admitting that he had mistakenly commissioned a negative ad and that he was playing the media like a fiddle . . . but then the MSM is ignoring it!?!
The reason those stories are being ignored by the MSM is . . . because they're hardly "stories."
Sharon,
Go easy on him . . . he was probably just trying to appear "tough."
Now they can brag to all their Liberal friends that they got arrested . . . it's the rewarding part of "Civil Disobedience." Were they going to keep singing Auld Lang Syne and taking up office space until Huckabee converted to their cause?
Ned,
Mmhmm. So, to be a good Christian, one has to bow down at the feet of Mike Huckabee, agree with him completely, and never question anything he does.
Then again, I'm Catholic, so it's not like Mr. Huckabee would consider me Christian anyway.
And if one disagrees with Mr. Huckabee, they should rightly be arrested and should wear such an arrest as a badge of honor -- because that's what "those people" do anyway.
With all due respect, I think I can see why you like Huckabee, Ned.
By the way, it might do you good to figure out exactly WHY the main stream media is light on Huckabee. As far as their concerned, he's the perfect Republican candidate -- and if he wins the nomination, you'll quickly find out why.
It won't be pretty.
This is too much fun! I'm Loving every minute of it.
SteveMule
Steve,
I can definitely see how Democrats might view this back-and-forth as fun. :)
it's one of the reasons I wish that the Republican Party would come to its senses.
But considering that Huckabee is STILL leading in (some) polls and that the Republican Party is who put forth George W. Bush twice, I don't have much confidence that will happen.
Oh...and NEWSFLASH...
Renee just told me that Carl Cameron said on TV this morning that Fox News would be running Huckabee's ad -- in it's entirety -- at 6:00pm Eastern tonight.
Gee, who couldn't have seen THAT coming?
I wonder -- is this free press or a violation of campaign finance law? Someone REALLY needs to investigate.
Post a Comment
<< Home