Filed under: Domestic Policy, Foreign Policy, News, Politics | Tags: Democrats, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Media Bias, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Obama, Republicans
For future reference, Super Tuesday is perhaps not the best day to spend setting up the new computer. We had a spike in traffic yesterday, people obviously looking in to see our predictions or take on which way the tsunami would wash — for which we are very grateful, and apologize for the lack of prognostication.
The reasons I didn’t post are several:
1. A bright shiny new computer with a big beautiful new monitor arrived on my doorstep and I couldn’t keep my hands off of it. (No doubt the timing of the delivery was a diabolical plot by liberals at UPS.)
2. Elephants never forget, and are therefore very insightful, but we are not, as yet, psychic, and therefore tend to shy away from predictions. And, in all seriousness…
3. Since Rudy withdrew from the race, I have been doing a great deal of thinking and I simply hadn’t fully reached my conclusions yet. (I’ve gotten much closer, however. More on that in the next post.)
Here are my observations of Super-Duper-Uber-Tsunami-Tuesday for what they’re worth:
First of all, if Obama wins the Democrat nomination and loses the general election — the mainstream media and the rest of the left will gnash their teeth and tear at their hair for the next four years proclaiming how racist America is. Never mind that he is utterly unqualified — they see only his skin color, so they presume the rest of America sees only his skin color as well.
In the interest, then, of equal standards and fair and balanced treatment, it must be said that since both Hillary and Obama are equally and utterly unqualified (the only distinctions between them being their genitalia and degree of pallor), then half the Democrat party is obviously racist and the other half blatant misogynists.
Secondly, McCain hasn’t won yet. It takes 1,191 delegates to secure the Republican Nomination. Senator McCain has only amassed 525. (The number he still needs to win? 666. Whether that’s amusingly coincidental or religiously significant is a judgement that rests far above my pay grade.)
The longer and tighter the race between Obama and Clinton, the better for Republicans. The longer their battle lasts, the more damage they do to each other, and the more money they spend.
Both Ted Kennedy and Mr. Theresa Heinz-Kerry endorsed Obama. The media made a huge stink about the former. Yet Massachusetts went decidedly for Hillary.
Nanny Huckabee has obviously made some sort of deal with McCain. Mitt Romney was cruising toward a victory in West Virginia so McCain threw all his support behind Huckabee to prevent a Romney win. Huckabee hasn’t got a chance of getting the nomination. It is now clear he remains in the race as a spoiler for Mitt Romney.
I think its disgraceful politicking, but it just goes to further support all the claims by conservatives who have known and worked with him, that the Huckster is a mean-spirited, vengeful and corrupt politician.
Oh, and have I mentioned, this election season is far too long?
Rich Lowry joins the ever-lengthening list of leading conservative thinkers strenuously opposing Mike Huckabee.
Dean circa 2008 has finally arrived. He is former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. Not because he will inevitably blow himself up in Iowa. But because, like Dean, his nomination would represent an act of suicide by his party. [read the whole thing]
I couldn’t agree more.
Mike Huckabee may be an evangelical Christian — but so was Jimmy Carter. And Huckabee’s record, and pronouncements far more closely resemble those of Carter (easily the worst. most disastrous president of modern times) than of Ronald Reagan, or even George W. Bush.
I don’t know what has some people so enamoured with the Huckster. Some claim it is his positive campaign.
But that’s not the Mike Huckabee people who know him describe. Conservative leaders who are familiar with him, and even his own staffers say he is calculating, mean and vindictive. Jimmy Carter is often described in similar terms.
Republicans have a big problem right now with a base that is disaffected.
The base is angry over Republicans’ liberal spending, liberal immigration policy, and dramatic expansion of the size and scope of the federal government.
Mike Huckabee is ten times worse on all these issues Republicans are so upset over. He is a big-spending, big-taxing, BIG-government “conservative” (if that isn’t an oxymoron, I don’t know what is) who has on numerous occasions made clear he thinks the federal government should be empowered to do things such as tell you how many fries you can have with your Big Mac. He is weak on immigration, weak on enforcement, and favors taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal immigrants. I have NO confidence he would appoint strict-constructionists to the courts.
Most alarmingly, Huckabee has zero foreign policy experience. And he has made a slew of deeply disturbing foreign policy pronouncements that are nearly identical to those made by Jimmy Carter and the Democrat presidential candidates.
The bottom line is that Mike Huckabee would be a disaster as President and a disaster for the Republican party. Phyllis Schlafly credits Huckabee with single-handedly destroying the conservative movement in Arkansas.
All indications are that he would do the same on a national level.
Please! If you are considering voting for Mike Huckabee, please research our archives and see what leading conservatives from the Wall Street Journal, National Review, Powerline, the CATO Institute, American Spectator, and many others have said about his highly distressing record, his disingenuous campaign, and his utter lack of conservatism.
And if after you do that, you are still considering voting for Huckabee, I implore you! please! research more!
Mike Huckabee is no conservative! And while I may be alone in feeling confident that most of our other front runners can soundly defeat Hillary, Obama, or even Edwards — I am in very distinguished, and increasingly populous company in believing that Mike Huckabee would almost certainly guarantee defeat, and that should he win, his presidency would be disastrous for conservatism in America.
Filed under: Politics | Tags: Democrat Lies/Dirty Tricks, Fred Thompson, John McCain, Mainstream Media, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani
Harsh, and appropriate, criticism of CNN’s Republican YouTube debate shenannigans from the LA Times:
In fact, this most recent debacle masquerading as a presidential debate raises serious questions about whether CNN is ethically or professionally suitable to play the political role the Democratic and Republican parties recently have conceded it.
Selecting a president is, more than ever, a life and death business, and a news organization that consciously injects itself into the process, as CNN did by hosting Wednesday’s debate, incurs a special responsibility to conduct itself in a dispassionate and, most of all, disinterested fashion. When one considers CNN’s performance, however, the adjectives that leap to mind are corrupt and incompetent. [read more]
At last count, Michelle Malkin had SEVEN Democrat operative plants in the debate. But lest you worry CNN isn’t fair or balanced, the Democrat debate was also plagued by Democrat political plants.
The “mainstream” media has moved far beyond bias and well into blatant propaganda and advocacy. These truly are dark times in the news industry, and as such, dangerous times for the republic.
Filed under: Politics | Tags: Democrat Lies/Dirty Tricks, Fred Thompson, Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, John Edwards, John McCain, Mainstream Media, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Obama, Rudy Giuliani
Those rascally reporters in the “mainstream” media have been working double-time to convince us for over a year now that ’08 is a lock — you may as well stay home, because Americans hate Republicans and will never, ever, ever elect one ever, ever again!
Many Republicans were even falling for it.
Not so fast.
Forget for a moment that the top Democrat candidates are all completely inexperienced, unqualified boobs. Forget also that their current front-runner has a track-record of corruption ten times the length of her resume. And remember that the media always tell us the election is the Democrat’s to lose. Both Al-Gore and John Heinz-Kerry were at one point or another inevitable victors according to the liberal media.
But wishful thinking is no substitute for factual reporting no matter how much the beltway propaganda-slingers wish it were so.
The conventional wisdom is horse-hockey.
The latest Zogby poll shows her thighness, Hillary Rodham, losing to all top 5 Republican contenders. Not just Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, but John McCain, Fred Thompson and even Nanny Huckabee.
The more Americans see the Democrat party, the less they like what they see.
I have been saying for some time now that Democrats will not nominate Hillary. I have suspected that they will panic, decide she is unelectable, and throw her under the proverbial, unionized, bus. This poll, I think, makes that possibility more likely.
As Iowa edges closer to the polls, columnist Bob Novak has joined the ever-lengthening list of conservative icons speaking out against Mike Huckabee. A list that is quickly becoming a who’s who of the conservative movement’s leaders and brightest thinkers. So far the list includes, John Fund of the Wall Street Journal, Phyllis Schlafly, National Review, The American Spectator, The Club for Growth (Huckabee White Paper here), The CATO Institute, The Economist, Ann Coulter (on the Michael Medved Show), Rich Lowry, and now Bob Novak slams Huckabee as,
“…a high-tax, protectionist advocate of big government and a strong hand in the Oval Office directing the lives of Americans.”
Novak goes on, as others have, to describe Huckabee as a man with a nasty, vindictive streak. Just what American politics needs! More nastiness!
And like others who have said Huckabee is much closer to a Bill Clinton type than a Ronald Reagan, Bob Novak points to Huckabee’s record as governor of Arkansas, positions and public record to prove his point:
There is no doubt about Huckabee’s record during a decade in Little Rock. He was regarded by fellow Republican governors as a compulsive tax-and-spender. He increased the Arkansas tax burden 47 percent, boosting the levies on gasoline and cigarettes. When he lost 100 pounds and decided to press his new lifestyle on the American people, he was hardly being a Goldwater-Reagan libertarian.
…Huckabee simply does not fit within normal boundaries of economic conservatism, such as when he criticized President Bush’s veto of a Democratic expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. Calling global warming a “moral issue” mandating “a biblical duty” to prevent climate change, he has endorsed a cap-and-trade system that is anathema to the free market…
Huckabee clearly departs from the mainstream of the conservative movement in his confusion of “growth” with “greed.” Such ad hominem attacks are part of his intuitive response to criticism from the Club for Growth and the libertarian Cato Institute about his record as governor. On “Fox News Sunday” on Nov. 18, he called the “tactics” of the Club for Growth “some of the most despicable in politics today. It’s why I love to call them the Club for Greed, because they won’t tell you who gave their money.” In fact, all contributors to the organization’s political action committee (which produces campaign ads) are publicly revealed, as are most donors financing issue ads.
That record is providing a clear picture of the direction Huckabee would take America and the Republican party in stark contrast with the image the candidate is trying to portray. A direction neither America nor Republicans can afford to pursue.
Mike Huckabee is not the man he pretends to be, and more and more conservatives are stepping forward to say so.
Not only is Huckabee a tax-raising, big-spender, but he seems to have serious ethical problems as well. Quin Hillyer at the American Spectator says,
If they only did a little homework, they would discover a guy with a thin skin, a nasty vindictive streak, and a long history of imbroglios about questionable ethics. [read more]
Pat Toomey at National Review is similarly critical:
But this flirtation does a great disservice to the conservative movement if it overlooks Huckabee’s stunning record of big-government liberalism.
During Huckabee’s tenure as governor, the average Arkansan’s tax burden increased 47 percent, according to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. A dyed-in-blue tax hiker, Huckabee supported raising sales taxes, gas taxes, grocery taxes, even nursing home bed taxes. He virulently opposed a congressional moratorium on taxing Internet access, and sat on the sidelines while his Democratic legislature pushed the largest tax hike in Arkansas history into law. What’s more, on his watch, and frequently at his behest, state spending increased by 50 percent, more than double the rate of inflation, and the number of state government workers rose by 20 percent. [read more]
Huckabee may be presenting himself as a conservative, but his record speaks of anything but.
Almost two months ago I wrote on this blog that,
“Governor Huckabee has just demonstrated without a doubt that he is no conservative. and has no clue what the constitutional role of the federal government is or ever was intended to be. He’s proven, probably without realizing it, that he is just another full-fledged, big-intrusive-government, nanny-state politician.”
Today I was joined in that assessment by John Fund of the Wall Street Journal and a whole slew of conservative leaders.
Back in August, I knew, as soon as Huckabee made clear he would enthusiastically favor and sign a nationwide smoking ban, that he is not conservative, doesnt understand conservatism, has no clue about the constitution or federalism and is nothing but another big-government nanny-state politician.
Seems I was right.
Phyllis Schlafly, according to Fund, says, “He destroyed the conservative movement in Arkansas, and left the Republican Party a shambles.”
Even his former aides are speaking out to warn Republicans that Huckabee is more like Bill Clinton than Ronald Reagan. Indeed, the frequency and ease with which he has abandoned conservative principles should be highly worrisome to all conservatives.
Read Fund’s column on Huckabee in it’s entirety. It’s a must read for anyone supporting Nanny Huckabee’s campaign.