HORRIBLE HUCK; PUSHING POPULIST PAP

The New York Post ^ | December 3, 2007 | George Will

[Eric Blair 2084]

snip

On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee's candidacy rests on serial non sequiturs: I am a Christian, therefore I am a conservative, therefore whatever I have done or propose to do with "compassionate," meaning enlarged, government is conservatism. And by the way, anything I denote as a "moral" issue is beyond debate other than by the uncaring forces of greed.

His is a moralist's version of the intellectual vanity once ascribed to Oxford's Benjamin Jowett:

My name is Jowett

Of Balliol College;

If I don't know it,

It is not knowledge.

Many Iowans think it would be wise to nominate a candidate who, when the Republicans were asked during a debate to raise their hands if they do not believe in evolution, raised his. But, then, Huckabee believes America can be energy independent in 10 years, so he has peculiar views about more than paleontology.

Huckabee combines pure moralism with incoherent populism: He wants Washington to impose a nationwide ban on smoking in public, show more solicitude for Americans of modest means and impose more protectionism, thereby raising the cost of living for Americans of modest means.

Although Huckabee is considered affable, two subliminal but clear enough premises of his Iowa attack on Mitt Romney are unpleasant: The almost 6 million American Mormons who consider themselves Christians are mistaken about that. And - 55 million non-Christian Americans should take note - America must have a Christian president.

snip

If Huckabee succeeds in derailing Romney's campaign by raising a religious test for presidential eligibility, that will be clarifying: In one particular, America was more enlightened a century ago.

[RockinRight]

Is this buddy of yours someone we’d know?

[txrangerette]

Unaccep(t)able!

[trisham]

...so why does George Will go out of his way to flame Huckabee??????

**************

Good question. Perhaps because the Huckster is a socialist?

[KC_Conspirator]

No, but his boss is.

[hunter112]

My nightmare is Huck as President, with a Rat-controlled Congress trying to “right all of the social wrongs of the Bush Administration”. He’d sign anything they passed, all in the name of looking cooperative.

[highball]

Shopping for its own right is a fine military goal. But W never asked Americans to make any personal sacrifice. He never asked us to roll up our sleeves, choosing instead to promise us that we wouldn’t get our hands dirty. Small wonder, then, that patience was short.

Besides, your history is a little off - even the Dims were smart enough not to mess with him at the time, which is why so many were cowed into voting for going into Iraq against the screeching of their core constituency.

W squandered his defining moment in history, and we’re going to be living with that for a very, very long time.

[samtheman]

Rockin’ good analysis, there, RockinRight.

[samtheman]

For the record, I am supporting the winner vs. Hildebeast.

For the record, I am supporting the Republican nominee against whoever the Jihadist-loving Treason Party nominates.

[sauropod]

mark

[apocalypto]

Mike Huckabee is for illegal aliens and that is vote against the US. He is a comic, weak figure, tax and Bog Brother type. Why do you think the media is pushing him. Because he is weak and a sure loser in '08.

Huckabee the bumblebee as our next great leader? hahahahahaha

[PerConPat]

...but I think Bush bears most of the blame for that...After 9/11, this nation was united. We would have worked together to hunt the terrorists down and defeat them. We would have pulled our weight, sacrificed, done what was asked of us. We only needed a leader to ask.

I wrote the President in Feb. 2002 encouraging him to put the country onto a war footing. Preparations for a military draft, equipment build up etc. were mentioned. I was very disappointed at the failure of this nation to at least send the message, while the iron was hot, to the world that America would again go on patrol.

Looking back, however, I now believe that the country was, and still is, much too weak to deal with the threat. IMHO, sadly, only a massive strike against the homeland will change this. I don't recall any politician of national stature beating the drum for mobilization after 911.

Decades of inattention to what was and is being taught in public schools and the distractions of debt based consumption have taken their toll. We are in the grasp of globalists, and it remains an open question as to whether Islamo-fascism will be attended to before we pay a horrendous price in our own backyard. It was and is probably beyond any POTUS.

[highball]

Looking back, however, I now believe that the country was, and still is, much too weak to deal with the threat.

That's a failure of leadership. The moment was there, but passed on by. It's far too late now.

We are in the grasp of globalists

and that's the problem right there....

[SUSSA]

George Will doesn’t like Huckabee, or anyone else, believing in creation. When Pat Buchanan was writing about fair trade instead of free trade, Will, on that Sunday show he used to be on with Sam Donaldson, said that fair trade was the equivalent of economic intelligent design, and no serious person believed in either one.

I never liked him much because he isn’t a movement conservative. But after that I had no respect for him.

[PerConPat]

That's a failure of leadership.

I certainly agree. But that also takes us to a chicken and egg discussion. Do leaders shape the nation or must there be a desire within the nation for leaders who will lead in this or that direction?

I would say that it takes both factors operating equally to forge a great nation. Adversity seems to be the catalyst for bringing about the leadership and support necessary to create and sustain a nation of free people. And it's going to take one hell of jolt to shake a fat, dumb, and happy society out of its slumber.

The only Pub candidate who consistently demonstrates, to me, that he knows just what's in play in the current situation is Hunter, and he's not going anywhere at this point. Huckabee's rise in the polls and Paul's substantial support are nothing more than an expression of the electorate's fascination with outsiders, a la Perot. The remaining Pub candidates, at present, seem to be once again coalescing in the middle of the road as has been the case since Reagan. That's what their pollsters are no doubt recommending.

[highball]

Can’t disagree with your summary of the current political situation.

I would argue that in late September of 2001, we had a nation desperately calling out for real leadership, a place we haven’t been since Pearl Harbor and which we (hopefully) won’t see again in our lifetimes.

[PerConPat]

...a place we haven’t been since Pearl Harbor and which we (hopefully) won’t see again in our lifetimes.

I concur, but I'm not holding my breath. Good talking with you...

[righteousindignation]

Alan Keyes is posted today on WorldNetDaily with conservative platform stated as I would wish!! We do not have a strong conservative candidate as I am sure you realize!!