Ron Paul Isn't That Scary

Townhall.com ^ | Wednesday, November 21, 2007 | Jonah Goldberg

[canuck_conservative]

As the hopeless but energetic presidential campaign of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) builds momentum in name recognition, fundraising and cross-ideology appeal, some conservatives are beginning to attack him in earnest. A GOP consultant condemns Paul's "increasingly leftish" positions. Syndicated columnist Mona Charen calls Paul "too cozy with kooks and conspiracy theorists." Film critic and talk-radio host Michael Medved looks over Paul's supporters and finds "an imposing collection of neo-Nazis, white supremacists, Holocaust deniers, 9/11 'truthers' and other paranoid and discredited conspiracists."

For the most part, these allegations strike me as overblown and unfair. But, for argument's sake, let's say they're not. Let's even say that Paul has the passionate support of the Legion of Doom, that his campaign lunchroom looks like the "Star Wars" cantina, and that his top advisors have hooves instead of feet.

Well, I would still find him less scary than Mike Huckabee.

While many are marveling at Paul's success at breaking out of the tinfoil-hat ghetto, Huckabee's story is even more remarkable. The former Arkansas governor and Baptist minister is polling in second place in Iowa and could conceivably win there. He's still a long shot to take the nomination and a pipe dream to take the presidency, but Huckabee matters in a way that Paul still doesn't. One small indicator of Huckabee's relevance: His presidential opponents are attacking Huckabee while ignoring Paul like he's an eccentric sitting too close to you on the bus.

What's so scary about Huckabee? Personally, nothing. He seems a charming, decent, friendly, pious man.

What's troubling about The Man From Hope 2.0 is what he represents. Huckabee represents compassionate conservatism on steroids. A devout social conservative on issues such as abortion, school prayer, homosexuality and evolution, Huckabee's a populist on economics, a fad-follower on the environment and an all-around do-gooder who believes that the biblical obligation to do "good works" extends to using government - and your tax dollars - to bring us closer to the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth.

For example, Huckabee would support a nationwide ban on public smoking. Why? Because he's on a health kick, thinks smoking is bad and believes the government should do the right thing.

And therein lies the chief difference between Paul and Huckabee. One is a culturally conservative libertarian. The other is a right-wing progressive.

Whatever shortcomings Paul and his friends might have, Paul's dogma generally renders those shortcomings irrelevant. He is a true ideologue in that his personal preferences are secondary to his philosophical principles. When asked what his position is, he generally responds that his position can be deduced from the text of the Constitution. Of course, that's not as dispositive as he thinks it is. But you get the point.

As for Huckabee - as with most politicians, alas - his personal preferences matter enormously because, ultimately, they're the only things that can be relied on to constrain him.

In this respect, Huckabee's philosophy is conventionally liberal, or progressive. What he wants government to do certainly differs in important respects from what Hillary Clinton wants, but the limits he would place on governmental do-goodery are primarily tactical or practical, not philosophical or constitutional. This isn't to say he - or Hillary - is a would-be tyrant, but simply to note that the progressive notion of the state as a loving, caring parent is becoming a bipartisan affair.

Indeed, Huckabee represents the latest attempt to make conservatism more popular. Contrary to the conventional belief that Republicans need to drop their opposition to abortion, gay marriage and the like in order to be popular, Huckabee understands that the unpopular stuff is the economic libertarianism: free trade and smaller government. That's why we're seeing a rise in economic populism on the right married to a culturally conservative populism. Huckabee is the bastard child of Lou Dobbs and Pat Robertson.

Historically, the conservative movement benefited from the tension between libertarianism and cultural traditionalism. This tension - and the effort to reconcile it under the name "fusionism" - has been mischaracterized as a battle between right-wing factions when it's really a conflict that runs through the heart of every conservative. We all have little Mike Huckabees and Ron Pauls sitting on our shoulders. Neither is always right, but both should be listened to.

I would not vote for Paul mostly because I think his foreign policy would be disastrous (Also, he'd lose in a rout not seen since Bambi versus Godzilla). But there's something weird going on when Paul, the small-government constitutionalist, is considered the extremist in the Republican Party, while Huckabee, the statist, is the lovable underdog. It's even weirder because it's probably true: Huckabee is much closer to the mainstream. And that's what scares me about Huckabee and the mainstream alike.

(Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online)

[incindiary]

Thanks, that's a great quote. In fact, I think been_lurking should read it, so I'll post it again...

"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is."

- Ronald Reagan

[Hunterite]

“Hunter supported both No Child Left Behind and the prescription drugs boondogle. Next question?”

*********

Who’s your favorite boy? Is it Romney, McCain, how about Thompson. Tell me so I can bash him.

[incindiary]

He DID want to fight the terrorists, he wanted to go after them specifically, not go to an undeclared, undefined war with a country.

[incindiary]

Do you know the difference between fighting terrorists over there and fighting them over here? That’s what Paul would bring to us is fighting suicide bombers and radical Jihadists in our Malls.

If the Jihadist threat in our malls is so great, why is Bush leaving the borders open?

[Eastbound]

Well, I don't think he's a liberal. ;>

Through the years I looked upon Ron Paul as someone with some excellent ideas that his peers would pick up on, though he was not one that was strong enough to lead the party. You'll have to admit his anti UN stance has always prompted a plethora of anti-UN graphics around here from time to time. I hope he stays in Congress and continues to serve as a voice against statists legislation, although a voice in the wilderness, it seems. I'm in agreement with much of what he says -- but not all.

[billbears]

But there's something weird going on when Paul, the small-government constitutionalist, is considered the extremist in the Republican Party, while Huckabee, the statist, is the lovable underdog. It's even weirder because it's probably true: Huckabee is much closer to the mainstream. And that's what scares me about Huckabee and the mainstream alike.

About right

Why are you all running away from your Libertarian flag?

I would ask why are you so concerned with labeling someone to a party? I've known Democrats in local office that make Republicans seem liberal. Course considering today's Republican is quite liberal that's not saying much anymore is it? Seems you're more concerned with a party than electing a representative to represent your views in Washington...

[Eric Blair 2084]

This is my ping list. I can't stand nanny staters. Huckabee is a smoker banning, anti fat crusading health nazi ever since he lost 110 pounds after his near death experiance at the hands of that global health menace...Big Mac, fries and a vanilla shake. If you want on, just let me know.

Big Brother, Nanny State, Grant Junky, Bogus Study, Junk Science, Social Engineering, Sheeple Control, Health Nazi

This is an extremely low volume ping list. 6 per week max. To be added to or deleted from this ping list, please click one of the following:

Eric, you are a genius add me to your ping list or Eric, you are a jackass, take me off this ping list

To request that I stop using these gay html colors and fonts, please send me a private message below.

____________________________________________________________________

Constitution of the Left Wing Nanny State of Liberals:

Picture courtesy of unixfox. All rights reserved. Copyright MMVII. Any use of the pictures descriptions or accounts of this ping without the express written consent of unixfox, Eric Blair, or Major League Baseball is strictly prohibited. Some restrictions apply. Ping not available in all states. For erections lasting longer than four hours, call the Guiness Book of World Records. Use only as directed.

Preamble:

We the People Sheeple of the United States Nanny State, in Order to form a more perfect Union Socialist Utopia, establish Justice Socially engineer a country of non smoking, physically fit, tea totallers, insure domestic Tranquility Smoking bans in bars, limits on unhealthy food and social drinking, provide for the common defense Universal Healthcare, promote the general Welfare health of the population whether they like it or not, in order to save above mentioned Universal Healthcare entitlement program from bankruptcy, and secure the Blessings of Liberty Dependency to ourselves progressive liberals and our Posterity Hitler Youth who we brainwash through public school education, do ordain decree and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Nanny State of Liberals.

[Eric Blair 2084]

Kool aid ping?

[lesser_satan]

Check this thread out.

[Secret Agent Man]

Yeah, the more I learn about Hunter, the more I think he’s the best choice in terms of his beliefs about things.

[DakotaRed]

Yeah, he wanted to issue Letters of Marque and Reprisal after Congress wouldn’t declare war. I don’t know what country he would declared war with since were not fighting a country, but I can just imagine the outcry of the rest of the world over his wanting to send bounty hunters after Bin Laden and the rest.

Maybe he didn’t realize the rest of the world outlawed Letters of Marque and Reprisal back in the mid 1800’.

[DakotaRed]

Ask Bush, that is one of my biggest disagreements with him. It is also one of the resons why I support Duncan Hunter, who has actually done something to curb the open borders.

[DakotaRed]

There are quite a few issues I could agree with Paul on. Then again, I imagine we could agree with Clinton on some too.

Paul’s anti-war stance in the face of three decades of radical Jihadist attacks against us, twice on our own soil now, trumps anything I might agree with him on.

[Fred]

Huckabee has no money, he is dead man walking after the feeble IA and NH races. Good luck in Florida.

Paul is another NOT SERIOUS candidate. I will consider Paul as soon as he resigns from congress.

[Eastbound]

Dittos!

[Mr. Silverback]

Usually Jonah has his eye on the ball, but he’s lost it here. A guy who’ll lose the war on purpose scares me plenty.

[Mr. Silverback]

Paul believes in a strong national defense, the just war theory, and free trade - he is not an isolationist.

He also believes in pulling funding from troops in combat and other actions that give aid and comfort to the enemy. I'd really love you to tell me how deposing Saddam Hussein violated just war doctrine.

[Mr. Silverback]

How the flip does an article about Nanny Huck turn into an anti-Ron Paul thread?

Um...had you noticed that the name "Ron Paul" is in the title of the article?

[Mr. Silverback]

Al Qaida is in iraq, was in Iraq before we went in, and is now suffering a hellish defeat there. Paul wants to flush that defeat down the crapper. Even if I agreed with his war strategy, I would reject him because he thinks a mistake should be corrected by defeat.

[Mr. Silverback]

If the Jihadist threat in our malls is so great, why is Bush leaving the borders open?

I'm certainly 100% opposed to Bush's immigration policy, but one has to ask: If Bush's anti-terror policies are so bad and Ron Paul could do so much better, how come we haven't been hit in six years?