The Powerline trashing of Huckabee is hardly surprising. Hawkishness on the Middle East and terrorism is by far the most important criterion used by PL to judge candidates. And as PL correctly points out, Huckabee doesn’t exactly have superhawk credentials on either.
Huckabee looks like an old-time isolationist at heart. He seems to want to build tariff barriers and basically tell the rest of the world to go away. I agree with PL that this view is naive and dangerous, to put it mildly. But after years of jangled nerves and Iraq casualties, I can understand the appeal of the Huckster’s pitch.
Left unspoken, or only indirectly spoken, is PL’s uneasiness with the Bible-thumping. I still remember Powerline’s distaste for Mel Gibson’s crucifixion epic, and it’s not hard to glimpse a bit of the same disapproval in their attitude toward the preacher man.
While I’m not crazy about his foreign policy or what passes for it, I mostly don’t like Huckabee because I don’t want the economy spoiled with higher taxes and punitive tariffs. I know, Huckabee has signed a pledge not to raise taxes. His record indicates this pledge would be every bit as binding as Bush Sr.’s read-my-lips oath.
My guess is that PL agrees with me on the economic arguments as well. But the Middle East and terrorism overshadow all other issues for Powerline, and I doubt Huckabee will ever make them comfortable.
By the way, I’ve been ribbing Powerline for ignoring the political danger to Hillary in Iowa. But I’ve been pretty blind myself...on why PL seems so enthusiastic about McCain.
After only 4,873,294 posts on the issues at Powerline, I finally realized that the Middle East and terrorism make any other subject look puny for the site. So McCain’s apostasy on immigration is negligible compared to his superhawkishness on what really matters to PL. After all, what other candidate has been literally singing “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran”?
I don’t expect Huckabee to burst out with this particular ditty any time soon. Neither does Powerline.
If I had to vote for anybody right now - and sooner or later I’ll have to vote for somebody - I’d pick Rudy. My guess is that he’s the second choice for the Powerline guys, as well.
Despite sniping over his messy personal life, I think Rudy will win through to the nomination. Won’t be easy, but McCain will drop out fairly early, and almost all of his support will go to Giuliani. No way McCain voters swoon for the Bible-thumper, and I don’t think flippety-floppety Mitt has much appeal for them, either. Thompson is all but gone from the race already.
Put McCain’s support together with Rudy’s current numbers, and he looks quite strong though by no means inevitable.
The Democratic side? Don’t look now, but meet Mr. Obama. The base loves and trusts him in a way they just don’t with Hillary. I know, she’s got big national numbers on her side, for now. But a few early setbacks could melt those numbers like snow in May...even in Minnesota (wink).
What irony, he is too moralistic to be a conservative pick, and on more than just national security issues. Perhaps imposing your morality on others is more of a liberal trait than a conservative one.
Is it too facile to observe that there was once another southern governor who was also very moralistic (no, not Bill Clinton) who
some think helped get us into the mess we now face in the Middle East? If memory serves, his name was James Earl Carter.
On domestic issues I think it’s fair to say that Carter governed
as a conservative (at least relative to today’s liberalism). And,
perhaps a President Huckabee might govern similarly. But, it was
certainly Carter’s moralistic impulses that turned his foreign policy into the total disaster it became, and would continue to
be, if his current advice was followed.
My main objection to Huckabee—the reason why he’s my fifth choice out of five—is that I lack confidence in his ability to fight terrorism. It’s not just that he lacks experience in this realm, though that’s certainly the case.
None of the candidates running, in either party, have any experience in fighting terrorism.
If I had to vote for anybody right now - and sooner or later I’ll have to vote for somebody - I’d pick Rudy. My guess is that he’s the second choice for the Powerline guys, as well.
Despite sniping over his messy personal life, I think Rudy will win through to the nomination. Won’t be easy, but McCain will drop out fairly early, and almost all of his support will go to Giuliani. No way McCain voters swoon for the Bible-thumper, and I don’t think flippety-floppety Mitt has much appeal for them, either. Thompson is all but gone from the race already.
Put McCain’s support together with Rudy’s current numbers, and he looks quite strong though by no means inevitable.
The Democratic side? Don’t look now, but meet Mr. Obama. The base loves and trusts him in a way they just don’t with Hillary. I know, she’s got big national numbers on her side, for now. But a few early setbacks could melt those numbers like snow in May...even in Minnesota (wink).
You have a warm spot in your heart for liberals? What would possess any Republican to even consider voting for Giuliani? Given his history, he’d be likely to make Jack Murtha his SecDef.
And the libs complain how conservatives try to legislate morality. They do the same. But in the negative tone. As Huckabee will do. Seems all Arkansas breeds is all the same.
By the way, I’ve been ribbing Powerline for ignoring the political danger to Hillary in Iowa. But I’ve been pretty blind myself...on why PL seems so enthusiastic about McCain.
After only 4,873,294 posts on the issues at Powerline, I finally realized that the Middle East and terrorism make any other subject look puny for the site. So McCain’s apostasy on immigration is negligible compared to his superhawkishness on what really matters to PL. After all, what other candidate has been literally singing “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran”?
I don’t expect Huckabee to burst out with this particular ditty any time soon. Neither does Powerline.
(Changed the PW’s to PL’s. I’m easy.)
All the candidates are wimps on immigration one way or another. But none have the national security experience that McCain has. So you have your pick. Lose on both issues or just lose on one. I rather go with the latter.
