[pallis]

“Is Huckabee all of those? Not by a long shot. Is he still electable? Not right now, but by 2012?” ...No.

“...socially conservative and fiscally liberal...” I consider this an oxymoron. Despite what you think you know about “social conservatives,” the vast majority of them would recoil at the thought of fiscal liberalness or big government. That is what separates many social conservatives from Huckabee. I agree with your thinking about the importance of morality and a strong culture. The problem is that big, unlimited government destroys culture, both intentionally and as a natural consequence. That’s why social conservatism can’t be separated from limited government. Neither can work politically without the other.

[Laissez-faire capitalist]

So, you consider fiscally conservative and socially liberal to be an oxymoron, too? You can’t have it both ways.

If you can’t be socially conservative and fiscally liberal and still be a true conservative, then you can’t be fiscally conservative and socially liberal and be a true conservative.

IMHO, you must be conservtive on both to be a true conservative.

IOW, libertarians (for example) are not true conservatives.

[rintense]

Huckabee isn't a social conservative. He wraps all his farcical alleged social conservatism in the 'Christian' label. But when you peel back the label, you see he's nothing more than your run of the mill RINO who cloaks social liberalism with compassionate Christianity.

"I raised taxes because children need roads." ~ Mike Huckabee, RNC debates 2008