Can’t agree with Huckabee on this. Number one, I think it’s a really bad idea to continue to harp on his Christian Leader status. At some point he’s going to have to start appealing to the small government crowd. This is a firm step in the opposite direction.
From the Washington Post.
Last month in Iowa, Huckabee noted the criticism against him for supporting tax increases while governor of Arkansas, and he said the “Washington establishment” was opposed to his candidacy in a party where social conservatives often do not wield the same power as do small-government conservatives.
“Many of us who have been Republicans out of conviction . . . the social conservatives,” he told reporters, “were welcomed in the party as long as we sort of kept our place, but Lord help us if we ever stood forward and said we would actually like to lead the party.”
If anyone was worried about the demise of the Reagan coalition…keep worrying. First, I think the statement is inaccurate…Social Conservatives have had a strong voice and a lot of power in the Republican Party, and small government types have been the ones that have been completely ignored (if the severe lack of vetoes until Embryonic Stem Cell research is ANY indication).
Second, I’m just waiting for him to say, “Yes I raised taxes in Arkansas, but I did what I had to do for my state…it was a State issue and State responsibility; and one thing I DIDN’T do was beg the Federal Government for more money. As President, I will leave the Governors to take responsibility for the welfare and education of their States’ citizens. At the same time I will address the issue that IS my responsibility, and that is secure the borders and fix the immigration system so that States like Arkansas don’t have to deal with the issues they SHOULDN’T have to deal with.” Or something like that…It would be a sound argument…accurate, and constitutionally sound.
If we don’t hear that, and soon, we have to operate under the assumption that he is going to “improve the lives” of Americans in exactly the same way as President as he did as Governor: more taxes and more programs. So instead of simply giving lip service to the tenth amendment, he’s going to have to cite specific examples why he would be a good arbiter of that right.
Also, someone interviewed Mr. Limbaugh the other day, and he has the opinion that the Democrats WANT Huckabee to be elected so Hillary can tear him to shreds and shut the “Evangelicals” up once and for all. It won’t work, but it does make you think.
And THIS is even worse:
“Especially with the economic insecurity people are feeling, they like that there’s a leader who, because of his religious belief, really wants to care for everybody,” said Hunter, who recently announced that he is backing Huckabee in the upcoming Florida primary. “It’s about evangelicals who are willing to care for people who are hurting, who are marginalized.”
Huckabee’s aides have been eager to dismiss the notion that he is only a Christian candidate, and Huckabee complained Saturday in Grand Rapids that debate questions about his faith are of “an unconstitutional nature,” since the Constitution forbids a religious test for potential officeholders.
I’ll admit that it must be aggravating to ALWAYS get the religious questions, but he’s obviously gotten used to it. Romney has to love it. But unconstitutional? Stop it. You’re killing me.
But we’re still waiting for evidence, or at least a strong affirmation, of this:
Instead, what Huckabee seems to have tapped into is what he is himself: a traditional Republican who advocates keeping taxes low and maintaining a strong military, but with strong roots in the social conservative movement.
