Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Huckabee Shows Thin Skin to Christian Right

The American Family Association Radio show recently had a long section about former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. Huckabee recently complained that leaders of the Christian Right were not rallying to his campaign simply because they doubted his ability to win, even though he was the one who reflected their values. Some have rallied to him though, as this fawning article from Janet Folger "It's Huckabee or Hillary") shows.

The audio has plenty of quotes from Huckabee: his paper-thin skin; "it's all about me" attitude; and sense of entitlement are on full display. Mike Huckabee presumes he is the only candidate in the race who reflects the views of the average conservative Christian, and that the only conceivable reason many Christian Right leaders do not back him is that they are more devoted to being close to power than their proclaimed ideals. Typical Huckabee hubris. I wonder why Huckabee thinks he is entitled to the Christian Right vote more than other struggling conservative candidates such Congressman Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo, or to some extent Senator Sam Brownback?

Huckabee seems to take the position that since he is the candidate who reflects their values then they should endorse him early regardless of the odds. I find at least two problems with this. The main one is that Mike Huckabee does not exhibit any understanding whatsoever of the biblical position on the purpose and limits of human government. He presumes to be the darling of the Bible Believers while advocating policies that are opposed to what the Bible itself teaches. He is a big-spending nanny-stater open borders globalist. No one who really understands what the Bible teaches about the purpose and limits of civil government could ever hold such views.

So even though Mike Huckabee seems to think that the problem is that leaders of the Christian right are hypocrites for not backing him, the real problem may be that Huckabee is simply wrong on the issues for these people. Despite his ego-centric views to the contrary on the matter, his positions don't define what it is to be "Christian Right". In fact there are a number of other struggling candidates whose philosophy of government is more in tune with theirs than is that of Huckabee. If the leaders of the Christian Right wanted to early-endorse a long-shot in tune with their views regardless of their chance to win, there are better choices than Mike Huckabee.

Maybe the leaders of the religious right are being careful after they lost a boatload of credibility by helping foist George W. Bush on us. If they push Huckabee the same way and he wins, I predict they will lose whatever street cred they have left. Speaking of Bush, they also discuss in the audio link (briefly) Bush's comments that people of all faiths "all pray to the same god". They rather lamely say, "well, he's not a theologian." Bzzzt. Wrong answer guys. The problem isn't that Bush is not a theologian, the problem is that Bush is a heretic.

I could go to the Adult Sunday School class at the First Baptist Church in Pea Ridge and they will know what the Bible says about the subject. They aren't theologians either, and you don't have to be to know these things. You just have to be an orthodox Christian. I am beginning to wonder, because of his own confession, if Bush really understands what it means to be an orthodox Christian, and I am certain that he does not govern biblically. Thus it disgraces the faith when the average person thinks that Bush policies are "the way a Christian governs".


Anonymous c.b. said...

I have the exact same reservatons with Huckabee as you do and I am equally frusterated with Bush on the same issues you are. That being said I would like to try to make a point;
While I decry conservatives who are supporting Rudy based on "electability" and feel they are selling out their principles, there inevitably comes a point where you have to factor in the reality of "can they win?".
I would love to see YOU become president... or ME even.... if I wanted someone that I agree with almost all of the time, but we both know it ain't gonna happen.

We have to face the fact that it takes a certain decorum to run for president. As much as I like them, Tancredo, Hunter & Paul do not have the persona or the communication skills that would be nessesary to win the general election, even if by some miracle they got the nomination.

And even a Huckabee detractor like yourself must admit; The Huckster has got that down. I think he is as good as Bill Clinton himself when it comes to platform skills.

Nevertheless, after much deliberation & with great frustration, I have personally come to the conclusion that Huckabee strikes that balance, for me. He is the closest to my principles that has a prayer of winning.

OK, Now it's your turn to straiten me out! LOL

6:31 AM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tancredo, Hunter & Paul do not have the persona or the communication skills that would be nessesary to win the general election

Does Bush have the persona or communication skills to be president? Ha ha!

6:36 AM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

Also, I tried to make a point a while back & I probably didn't explain myself good.....
You say Huckabee will cost the Christian Leaders their credibility.
I disagree on this basis;
Many of them are mostly concerned about the hot button social issues, namely abortion & marriage. They overlook or don't understand some of the issues we also care about such as, the role of government,etc.

Unlike Bush, who I believe merely pandered to the Christian Right, Huckabee, on those two issues, is a true believer & would do what is right every time. So I don't see him betraying them or hurting their credibility.

6:45 AM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

"Does Bush have the persona or communication skills to be president? Ha ha!"

He does have a certain dignity & class, despite his flaws.
On comunication, yes he is sorely lacking. Why do you think he has had so much trouble making his case on any issue.
Personally, I don't want another President that can't hold his own with the media.

6:51 AM, October 17, 2007  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...


Definitely not my job to "straightin you out". We are all on a journey together here.

My comments were directed at MH's remarks in the radio show. If you heard those remarks you will know that MH's point was not that he was the best communicator that lines up with CR values, but that he was THE MAN.

My point is that his values DON'T line up with most of the CR in this country as regards to size and scope of government or illegal aliens (which ties into the larger issue of national sovereignty and I see no signs he is there either).

On Defense of Marriage I have to give him an "A", on pro-life a C+ ("A" on form but "D" on substance. I give South Dakota legislature an "A+" on substance).

I can't think of any other issue where I agree with Michael Dale Huckabee. Not education (central control and testing), not roads (borrow as much money as you can even for routine maintenance), not health care (soclialized medicine), not Iraq (I don't think the taxpayers of the United States are obligated to send blood and treasure until Iraq is "fixed", they were never fixed). Not size and scope of government (nanny state is now responsible for your body-fat percentage). I can't think of one other issue of any scope or controversy where I agree with Michael Dale Huckabee.

I agree that he is a fabulous public speaker, as was Derr Shlickmiester, but that makes me MORE afraid of what he can accomplish in office. I would rather actually have Hillary Clinton in there because she is like fingernails on a chalkboard relative to the Huckster and will do a much worse job of selling the same globalist and nanny-state bill of goods.

Why are you backing Mike Huckabee? What issues does he have that you agree with?

7:02 AM, October 17, 2007  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

I have some things to say about Paul "not having the skills" too, but I may make a whole new piece about it.

7:03 AM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

The only issue you & I disagree on is Iraq/War on terror.

As to the other Huckabee positions; Maybe I'm naive, but I don't think he is a raging liberal on those issues (education, nanny-state Government, healthcare) I just think he is a little weak & I disagree with him on the nuances. Of course I am speaking in general terms. Oh & for the record, I have never seen any evidence that Huck favors socialized medicine.

Remember I told you I am frustrated! I am not happy with my choices....
He is merely the closest that I deem to have a prayer.

Mark, consider two things;
1. Huck is from Arkansas. Therfore we know every little thing bad there is to know about him (you cited "roads" as an issue in a presidential race, for example). What issues/positions are out there on some others that we aren't aware of?

2. The guy's we like are all representatives. They have a little more luxury of sticking to their guns. They can literally vote up or down on any issue & never be blamed for the long term results.
A governor is in a much tighter spot(especially a Republican Gov. with a Dem controlled legislature). He must work with what he has & make some compromises. He wins some & loses some, but gets the blame for everything that goes wrong.

I know you like Paul. I do too, he is a true-blue conservative and he makes his arguments passionately, But too much so. He is entirely too quirky & eccentric. Even when he is saying things I totally agree with he sounds crazy.
We may just have to agree to disagree on Paul....

8:22 AM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The main one is that Mike Huckabee does not exhibit any understanding whatsoever of the biblical position on the purpose and limits of human government"

Please explain what you mean here. please sight you biblical verses

11:45 AM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

I just reread your post & I have to ask;
Were you just being rhetorical or do you actually mean that you would rather have Hillary Clinton in the White House than Mike Huckabee????

3:34 PM, October 17, 2007  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

That would be a lot of typing. If you are willing to listen to it on audio, go to http://www.christianconstitutionalsociety.org
and from there to "The Town Crier". There is an audio file there about whether or not it is scriptural to give public benefits to illegal aliens. There is another one there on "Jesus vs. The Welfare State". A few other topics, like government education, are addressed there as well.

3:41 PM, October 17, 2007  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...


Hillary vs. Huckabee

If Hillary got elected, you would stay vigilant and help me fight her statist agenda. I am afraid if Huckabee got elected you would assume things are OK now and I would have to fight the same agenda without your help.

There is also the frog and the boiling pot analogy. Hillary would overplay her hand and cause a backlash- the frog might wake up and jump out of the pot. Right now the American frog gets reassured and stays in the pot because once in a while they change chefs.

My one hesitancy is that I still think Huckabee might be sincere in his pro-life beliefs. I DON"T think the last two that Bush appointed will overturn Roe, they had a chance to three months ago and did not do it.

Will MH do better? Well, when he first took office he said, "we are not going to pay for medicare abortions with tax dollars, even though it is mandatory". I was thrilled with his determination. They threatened to cut off all of our funding, MH came up with a compromise where people could contribute to a fund for that and Arkansas Medicare would only pay for abortions with those dollars.

A couple of years before he left office, MH quietly closed down the fund and restored taxpayer funding of Medicade abortions in Arkansas.

I am not convinced MH will really risk political capital by taking on Roe head on. If I was, I would take MH over Hillary on that issue alone. As it is, I am honestly not sure what to do.

3:58 PM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I understand what you're saying about pesona, but frankly, I think people are fed up to the point that they're willing to overlook persona for substance.

I know I am!

5:33 PM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

When it comes to appointments to the Supreme Court, Huckabee (or even Guiliani for that matter) will, at the very least, be subject to pressure from their conservative base to nominate a constructionist. Hillary on the other hand will not. In fact, she will be glad to please her kook base by appointing another Buzzy Ginsberg.
That alone will probably be the deciding factor that will require me to pull the lever for the GOP candidate, regardless of how disgusted I would be with a Frudy McRomney ticket.

Mark, I have had the same flashes of passion that said "the GOP deserves to lose & maybe that loss would bring them back to their roots", but if Hillary replaces one or two of our next vacancies on the SC with liberal activists. We are literally sunk.
I am not being dramatic. It won't be visible overnight, but we won't be able to survive 20 more years of those kind of rulings.

5:46 PM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

Anonymous said...
"I understand what you're saying about pesona, but frankly, I think people are fed up to the point that they're willing to overlook persona for substance.

I know I am!"

I wish I had that much faith in the public. Sadly, I think the people that make their choice based on substance are few and far between.
Remember all the women that voted for Gore because he french-kissed his wife on stage......

5:51 PM, October 17, 2007  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Pressure from the base? Like Bush has been under pressure from his base on illegal aliens? Please, let's be realistic. Our only hope is to bravely face reality, not indulge in vain hopes.

If you elect Guliani, and maybe even CFRed, they will treat you with all the respect that Clinton treated Monica L. With all the respect that Guiliani treated his wife and kids- that is to say, none at all. What reason is there to believe that he will treat us strangers any better, once he has what he wants from us (the vote)?

There is ZERO chance that either Fraud or Rooty will knowingly appoint judges who would overturn ROE. I disagree with them on just about every issue, and have little respect for them as men. If this nation as we knew it ends, let the record show at least that I and my house did not vote for those who ruined it- of either party. That choice, whether or not to play along with a rigged game, may be the only choice we have left.

6:38 PM, October 17, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

Two words: Harriet Miers

7:11 PM, October 17, 2007  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Newsflash: Brownback to drop out of race tomorrow. I think this helps Mike Huckabee more than anyone else.

9:53 AM, October 18, 2007  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

The base helped with Miers, but she was also opposed by the Dems. I don't think she could have passed their gauntlet, so you cannot discount the possibility that Bush would have run roughshod over his former base with her just as he tried to do with illegals, but in the Meirs case realized that it was not going to fly with the Dems.

12:16 PM, October 18, 2007  
Anonymous c.b. said...

The Dems will oppose any nominee by a republican president unless they promise to uphold Roe.
Bush would have fought for her because she was one of his cronies, but when the base literally rose up in protest he knew he didn't have a prayer.
That's exactly what I mean about pressure......we have more influence and a much better chance with a Republican in the WH.

By the way I think you are dead on about Brownback's pull-out benefiting Huckabee the most.

1:54 PM, October 18, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home