Huckabee’s Anachronistic Brand of Progressivism

The National Review ^ | May 27, 2015 | Jonah Goldberg

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

How about the National Gay Review’s brand of progressivism?

[x]

Jonah's channelling the argument of From Billy Graham to Sarah Palin: Evangelicals and the Betrayal of American Conservatism, a book that came out a few years back and blamed Evangelicals for not being Burkean conservatives (or was it free market conservatives -- I'm not sure now). The author argued that "the evangelical temperament is inherently progressive."

If so, it's part of the facts of life. Burkean conservatives are pretty rare in America, and free market purists are nowhere near a majority. If you want to get anything done in politics you have to work with people who don't agree with you about everything. Once in a while, they may actually be right about something, maybe even more right than oneself.

But Huck is too much yesterday's guy. He won't have much of a following among people who actually follow politics. A lot of people don't follow politics though.

[SoConPubbie]

She believe SHE was god.

Once again, SO WHAT?

What does that fact have to do with the discussion at hand?

[donna]

Get the Feds out of it and then states, counties and cities can chose the social programs they want to support. People from other states can do it differently.

But, nothing will remove the need for God in our culture and if the GOP-E continues on joining with the Democrats to try to ditch God, they will collapse the country.

A Huckabee presidency would back off that day of collapse.

[gusty]

I see you have not read many, if any, books about US history in your time. What Jonah Goldberg is writing about is basic Turn of the 19th/20th Century American history. If you bothered to ever read any books on the subject, you would know that evangelicals, for the most part, leaned to the Left right up to the election of Jimmy Carter in 1976, who they voted for. The issues that concern them today were pretty much the consensus on all sides of the aisle until the 60’s, thus they voted for more activist government in the economic sphere (where the two parties differed). Small government conservatism was not all that popular in the South and other rural areas. Believe it or not, the stereotypical Small Government Conservative was to be found in states like Vermont and Massachusetts back in those days.

[Poison Pill]

this is an anti-God piece of filth

Huckabee isn't God.

[donna]

I think your reading has lead you to misunderstand why Christians vote for a man.

They were told Nixon was a criminal and Carter was a good Baptist.

They’ve just been trying to vote for a good Christian man all along.

If the GOP-E didn’t have contempt for God, they would provide a candidate close to a good Christian each time and they would win each time.

[x]

True enough, but what would Republicans or conservatives be without the Evangelicals? Either they’d be a much smaller party or they’d have to find votes in groups that are even less conservative than Evangelicals. If you define the conservative base as limited government free marketeers or as Burkean traditionalists, you don’t have a very big base.

[sagar]

So Huckster represents God? Perhaps a socialist God requiring the gubmint assistance in carrying out those Godly duties like pardoning rapists and murderers and making excuses for pedophiles and enablers.

[MrEdd]

To be a progressive he would have to have an ideology.
Huck sterling is an opportunist. He sells his snake oil wherever he can turn an profit. He cloaks self serving mercenary endorsements of any product, candidate or position in biblical language. And he doesn’t even bother to see if those candidates or products are antithetical to anything or anyone else that he has been hawking.

The man appears to be an insincere con man cut in the classic fraudulent evangelist mold.