Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Social conservatives can only blame themselves, if they are cut out of GOP presidential picture
RFFM.org ^ | January 27, 2008 | Daniel T. Zanoza

Posted on 01/31/2008 12:21:01 PM PST by Daniel T. Zanoza

Commentary By Daniel T. Zanoza, Executive Director, RFFM.org

I know I'm going to regret this because every time I talk about my favorite political candidates, e-mails from RFFM.org readers with differing views come in like ants at a picnic. Because of my political opinions, one day I'm called one of the most articulate men on the face of the earth and a week later I'm being compared to one of the greatest idiots of all time. It gets even worse, but my life is pretty good, so I can't complain. What I've learned about politics is you can't please everyone any of the time, no matter how hard you try.

However, there is something that needs to be said about this year's battle for the Republican presidential nomination. The best social conservative in the bunch is former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. You might disagree with his economic policies, including his support of the Fair Tax initiative. You might disagree with how he governed a state that was dominated by a Democratic legislature and you might not agree with his failure to blindly agree with economic globalism--which some of us feel has hurt the U.S. middle-class. Yet there is one thing which cannot be disputed. Mike Huckabee would support a Constitutional Amendment to outlaw abortion in America. Huckabee would support a Constitutional Amendment that would define marriage as being solely between one man and one woman. And Huckabee would build a fence, in order to stop the flow of illegal immigrants over our nation's border with Mexico. None of his opponents are so strong on all three of these social issues.

If you disagree with Huckabee's positions on abortion, gay "marriage" and illegal immigration, then he's not your man. If a global economy and sustaining corporate wealth are your priorities, then Huckabee would probably rate very low on your list of individuals seeking the GOP's nod for the presidential election in November.

In a previous column, I listed some of the issues social conservatives should be concerned with regarding the candidacies of John McCain, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. John McCain voted for government-funded research on embryonic stem cells and, if he is elected president, a bill which would provide funding for this kind of "mad science" would cross his desk in the first 100 days and he would sign it. With all the problems some of us had with George W. Bush, the man stood by his guns and vetoed such legislation. McCain would support it.

John McCain also had a plan to give "amnesty" to the 12 million illegal immigrants who now reside in the United States. McCain now says he's heard the American people and he would "secure the border first." Yet McCain hints at giving some sort of special treatment to the illegal immigrants who have broken the law by entering this country, literally under the darkness of night. And John McCain's position on the appointment of federal judges is not as solid as many think. I don't believe we would see a Judge Roberts, Scalia or Thomas nominated by President John McCain.

In a way, McCain is a man of compromise. One of his best friends in the U.S. Senate is Joe Lieberman. Indeed, some have speculated on whether McCain might choose Lieberman as his running mate, if nominated. Lieberman is a pro-abortion, anti-gun, big government Democrat and the fondness these two men have for each other should send a shiver down the spine of pro-family conservatives. Of course, McCain can have a friendship with a Democrat, especially Lieberman, because he seems to be a good man at heart. But Lieberman still supports the right to kill the innocent unborn and someone once gave me good advice when they said you can judge an individual's character by the company they keep.

Mitt Romney is the co-front runner in the Republican Party, at least the media would like you to believe so. FOX News loves him. Well, FOX News loves everyone--except Mike Huckabee. However, Mitt Romney only recently has seen the light when it comes to abortion, special rights for homosexuals, Second Amendment rights and ... I could go on and on. The fact is Mitt Romney was a pro-abortion, pro-"gay" governor from Massachusetts--before he decided to run for the presidency as a Republican. If he would have decided to switch parties and become a Democrat, Romney would be in favor of abortion rights, gay "marriage" and gun control at this very moment. Florida would be deluged with ads proclaiming the need for change and calling for U.S. troops to vacate IRAQ asap, including a statement saying, "I'm Mitt Romney and I approve this message."

I'm sorry, but I don't understand how a 50 something year old man can suddenly realize he was wrong about abortion his entire life, unless he went through some sort of spiritual transformation. To my knowledge, Mitt Romney is a Mormon, was a Mormon when he ran for governor of Massachusetts and was a Mormon when he was 20 years old and attending the finest schools money could pay for. Some might buy Romney's miraculous Epiphany. Excuse me for using the word "buy" because every time I think of Romney, the words buy or purchase seem to enter my mind. In any case, I'm not going for it. But some social conservatives undoubtedly have and will. Caveat emptor.

Then, there's the "president" of New York, Rudy Giuliani. The FOX News Channel's favorite son kept us safe after 9-11, didn't he? Or did he allow thousands of New Yorkers to be exposed to deadly toxins, including the brave fire fighters who searched Ground Zero after that fateful day. Did Giuliani's ignorance make the 9-11 disaster worse? Well, the study is still out concerning that issue, but it doesn't look good for the former "president" of New York. Imagine, we could have Senator Hillary Clinton of New York vs. Rudy Giuliani of New York -- with current Mayor Mike Bloomberg of New York running as a third Party candidate in November's presidential election. Those of us in "fly-over country" might as well pack our bags because it sure doesn't look like any of these individuals would represent us.

Giuliani's record on abortion; rights based on how you have sex; gun control; and support for sanctuary cities would make him a great nominee for the Democratic Party. In fact, he might be a bit too far to the left for even Democrats. And Giuliani may have to bring his politics regarding social issues back in line with the voters in Central Park...oops, I meant the central part of our country. Seriously, the fact John McCain and Mitt Romney are the so-called front runners among Republicans proves one thing. The GOP elite cares little about social conservatives and the issues which motivate them. These power brokers only tolerate pro-family Republicans, even though, without this important political voting bloc, the GOP would lose every election from now until doomsday.

Therefore, the strategy was obvious when it looked like Mike Huckabee would become the clear leader for the Republican Party's presidential nomination as the race moved to South Carolina last week. At that time, every political observer knew Fred Thompson had little or no chance of waging a serious campaign. Thompson was falling in the polls every day and he should have stepped out of the race after Michigan. Thompson is a good man and would have been a fine pro-family advocate in the White House. However, it was clear he didn't have the will or the want to do what was necessary to be a viable candidate and it was painfully obvious.

The Republican Party did have a mission for Sen. Fred Thompson, however and he may not have been a willing participant, at least I hope not. I would guarantee you there were high-ranking Republicans encouraging Thompson to stay in the race until South Carolina, even though the polls indicated Thompson might have trouble finishing third in that state. Why did the Republican elite want Thompson in the race so badly? The results of the South Carolina Republican primary answered that question. Thompson took away many of the votes that would have gone to Huckabee. Again, Thompson finished third in South Carolina, but he did just enough damage to Huckabee to allow John McCain to claim a razor thin victory. It was a shrewd, calculated political effort, something that Karl Rove would be proud of. Indeed, he might have thought of it. However, it did one thing. The South Carolina outcome took much of the wind out of Huckabee's sails as the Party headed for Florida. The results also hurt Mike Huckabee's fund-raising efforts.

You see, Huckabee supporters are not the big high-rollers, money-wise, within the GOP. Those who support Huckabee, according to exit polling, are middle-class, poor pro-family conservatives and many of those who were formerly called Reagan Democrats. These are blue collar workers, perhaps steel workers from Pennsylvania or Ohio who have fallen upon hard times as their jobs left the U.S. for foreign shores. In contrast, Romney, McCain and Giuliani receive their support from either corporate-related sources or Republicans with extremely deep pockets. Even though Huckabee finished a very close second to McCain in South Carolina, the Republican Party, with the help of the press, essentially said Huckabee's chances were over.

Saying much more would lead us all into the deep and dark chasms of inside politics where it is not important to go at this time. Yet there is a failure by some in the Republican elite to realize the conviction of pro-family conservative voters and the fact there are indeed poor Republicans or let me call them financially-challenged to be politically correct. Whatever the case, this voting bloc will not sacrifice its values and, if Rudy Giuliani becomes the Republican Party's nominee, this group will either hold their nose while voting or sit out the election entirely. The GOP elite in Washington, D.C. don't understand such moral conviction and they probably never will.

You may be asking the million dollar question. Why would the braintrust of the Republican Party, including members of the media--like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter--be so adamantly against Huckabee? To that matter, why would FOX News, the supposed fair and balanced network, along with the dominant media try to derail Huckabee's campaign? I know what you're thinking...I'm paranoid. But, it is said there is no such thing as paranoia, if the danger is real. Big money Republicans believe Mike Huckabee just might build a fence along the border with Mexico, stopping the flow of illegals into the United States. How would this hurt them, you ask. It would hit big business right in the pocket book. Illegal immigrants supply many huge corporations with cheap labor which depresses the earning power of poor Americans--black and white. But it's cheap labor all the same. The fence would also stop the flow of drugs into the United States. If that happened, what would we do with all the judges and lawyers and prosecutors and ... you get the idea. Narcotics has become an institution in America and much of that flow comes across our border along the Rio Grande. Huckabee would also question some of our trade with countries like China which--while devaluing the dollar--build up their military and take more jobs away from Americans.

It's not that Huckabee would raise taxes as the "Club for Growth" claims. Huckabee has pledged not to do so. John McCain hasn't. But McCain is part of the good ole boys club and his membership in the Senate gives him a pass, even though his record regarding taxes and Republican allegiance can surely be questioned.

Finally, Huckabee would probably truly press for a Constitutional Amendment to ban abortion. That industry earns billions of dollars for doctors, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and the insurance industry. These are mighty forces Huckabee has arrayed against him, not to mention the IRS--which Huckabee pledges to abolish. What about the tax lawyers, prosecutors, and companies like H + R Block who depend on the confusion generated by the antiquated and complicated tax code? And let's not forget about the media. Every time Huckabee has risen to the top of national polls, you've never heard about it. Indeed, today Huckabee is ranked second--by one of the major pollsters. But what's the best way to make sure a candidacy fails? Simply ignore it. On Hannity + Colmes (FOX News) last week, Sean Hannity said Huckabee had dropped out of the race in Florida. This was an outright lie, but it was consistent with the FOX News Channel's first plugging Rudy Giuliani, then Mitt Romney, then Fred Thompson and now FOX is back on the Romney bandwagon because Roger Ailes, the network's CEO, dislikes McCain almost as much as Huckabee.

So that's it. Social conservatives who haven't done their homework will end up getting what they deserve in either John McCain or Mitt Romney. It's a sad story, but, in a way, it tells us who's really running the show in America and, folks, it's not us.


TOPICS: Government; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: gopprimary; huckabee; mccain; romney; taxhikemike
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 01/31/2008 12:21:04 PM PST by Daniel T. Zanoza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza

And RINOs will get what they deserve....Oh wait, so cons will get the blame for that too.


2 posted on 01/31/2008 12:23:35 PM PST by cripplecreek (Duncan Hunter, Conservative excellence in action.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
Big money Republicans believe Mike Huckabee just might build a fence along the border with Mexico, stopping the flow of illegals into the United States.

I don't see why they would. His record most emphatically states otherwise.

}:-)4

3 posted on 01/31/2008 12:24:52 PM PST by Moose4 (Wasting away again in Michaelnifongville.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
"What I've learned about politics is you can't please everyone any of the time, no matter how hard you try."

Wow, even god Ole Abe Lincoln wasn't that jaded. /grinning

4 posted on 01/31/2008 12:27:31 PM PST by ImpBill (Greg Adams - Tee time already made for 11/4/08 - pssst I am a conservative but not a Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moose4
just might

LOL, is that "just might" before are after the free education.

5 posted on 01/31/2008 12:33:27 PM PST by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza

Mike “Open Borders for Jesus” Huckabee strong on illegal immigration?! Yeah, strongly in favor of it! Peddle that crap some place where sheeple hang out. We know better!


6 posted on 01/31/2008 12:34:59 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (Second To None!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza

Supporting Constitutional amendments with no chance of being enacted isn’t exactly the shining reason to become President..... Building a southern border fence is laudable and will happen as the people are beginning to get the attention of the powers that be in D.C. etc.

In my opinion what we don’t need as President at the present time is another ‘man from Hope’ nor the wife of the other ‘man from Hope’.....


7 posted on 01/31/2008 12:35:01 PM PST by deport ( --5 days Super Tuesday -- [ Meanwhile:-- Cue Spooky Music--])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moose4
He said he would. McCain now says he would. Not sure Mitt came down hard and fast on that one though.

I think it's best to vote for the guy who says he will reserve ALL immigration slots for those who legally apply and await their turn.

There's really no reason why Mexicans should be allowed to eat up all the immigration slots for the entire world for the next 50 years. That would be immoral in fact.

8 posted on 01/31/2008 12:37:17 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
And Huckabee would build a fence, in order to stop the flow of illegal immigrants over our nation's border with Mexico.

Only if it had a long salient to permit access to the Tyson plants in Arkansas.

9 posted on 01/31/2008 12:37:40 PM PST by steve-b (Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense. --RAH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
It's not that Huckabee would raise taxes as the "Club for Growth" claims. Huckabee has pledged not to do so.

LOL! Don't pay attention to what he actually did; pay attention to his promises.

10 posted on 01/31/2008 12:39:35 PM PST by steve-b (Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense. --RAH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ImpBill

What Lincoln said was, “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and the rest will watch.”


11 posted on 01/31/2008 12:42:19 PM PST by Richard Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza

RINOPLASTICS then can only blame themselves if so-cons take a walk.


12 posted on 01/31/2008 12:49:03 PM PST by ex-snook ("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
And Huckabee would build a fence, in order to stop the flow of illegal immigrants over our nation's border with Mexico. None of his opponents are so strong on all three of these social issues.

Nothing in Huckabee's past would suggest he would even allow the fence to be built, let alone take any intitiative in getting it built.

13 posted on 01/31/2008 12:49:22 PM PST by VRWCmember (Romney 2008 - The most palatable RINO left in the race)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza

The social conservatives who have nobody but themselves to blame are the ones who support Huckabee rather than Romney (the only one who can defeat McCain) only because Romney’s Mormon, rather than voting for Romney because he’s right on the issues and would nominate conservative judges.

As a result, we get McCain, who is wrong on most issues, would likely nominate liberal judges, and is a habitual liar to boot. Well done.


14 posted on 01/31/2008 12:50:53 PM PST by tabsternager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza

A social conservative is a democrat in a good suit. We are in deep doo come November.


15 posted on 01/31/2008 12:53:09 PM PST by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
Finally, Huckabee would probably truly press for a Constitutional Amendment to ban abortion.

Before we lost control of the senate, we couldn't even get 60 votes to force an up and down vote on decent judicial appointments. How much success do you think Huckabee would have in convincing 67 senators to vote for a Right to Life Amendment? Here's a hint for you -- he wouldn't even try because he knows it is a complete non-starter and he is a very calculating politician who will weigh the political benefit to him before undertaking any such action. Zero political benefit, zero chance of success = zero likelihood of Huck's expending of any energy on the issue.

16 posted on 01/31/2008 12:54:37 PM PST by VRWCmember (Romney 2008 - The most palatable RINO left in the race)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
It's not that Huckabee would raise taxes as the "Club for Growth" claims. Why did he call them the "Club for Greed"?
17 posted on 01/31/2008 12:55:18 PM PST by VRWCmember (Romney 2008 - The most palatable RINO left in the race)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

Have the RINOs ever blamed themselves for anything?


18 posted on 01/31/2008 12:56:15 PM PST by cripplecreek (Duncan Hunter, Conservative excellence in action.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza

So, is Arnie, the “fiscal conservative” still a conservative now? NO.

Those who wish to engage in the fiction that one can be a conservative while rejecting half of the reasoned moral foundation that conservativism is founded upon, are only fooling themselves.

They are called RINO’s.


19 posted on 01/31/2008 12:57:54 PM PST by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publici scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
More like:
Social conservatives who haven't done their homework believe whatever Huckabee's saying now as opposed to what his record states will end up getting what they deserve

Sorry, no more conservatives left in this race, only flip-floppers and nanny-staters trying to talk the good talk.

20 posted on 01/31/2008 1:05:11 PM PST by highball ("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson