Carol Platt Liebau: "Compassionate Conservatism on Steroids"

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

"Compassionate Conservatism on Steroids"

Jonah Goldberg lays out a few truths about Mike Huckabee that should make fans of limited government very unhappy.

If it's true that Rudy Giuliani's perceived unpalatability to pro-life conservatives is serious problem, so too is Huckabee's to small government conservatives.

Huckabee has been enjoying a good run in the MSM. There are, perhaps, three distinct reasons for this:

(1) Many of his positions -- like his tax scheme and support for a nationwide smoking ban -- sound like those of typical nanny state liberals.

(2) He would be easy to beat in a national election. All the things about Huckabee that don't bother conservatives -- but would bother liberals and some independents, like his background as a Baptist preacher and some of the finer points of his theology -- would be presented so as to make him seem like the 21st century equivalent of the flat earth society. This is especially true if Republicans themselves open the door to making theological examinations relevant through their own treatment of Mitt Romney. And some of the ethical questions that have been raised about Huckabee should bother everyone.

(3) Having Huckabee in the race rejuvenates coverage that some in the MSM might feel goes stale with repeated stories that acknowledge Romney and Giuliani as the frontrunners.

In any case, this Huckabee boomlet does no one any good -- except, perhaps, Mike Huckabee.


Blogger Ruth Anne Adams said...

Don't forget Chuck Norris.

3:24 PM  
Blogger stackja1945 said...

Carol, the people have to decide do they want large government or small government. FDR created the model of large government to fight "The Depression". Hitler and Tojo ended "The Depression" not FDR. So why continue with large government? It did not work then, it does not work now nor will it work the future.

5:53 PM  
Blogger Joe Steel said...

The People decided long ago they want big government. In fact, the US government never was intended to be either small or of limited power. That idea is a myth. Although cherished by conservatives, it is nothing more. From the first Bank of the United States to the Louisiana Purchase to the Homestead Act to the New Deal, the government does what the People want it to do. That's why they created it.

3:57 AM  
Blogger Joshua Stein said...

The real problem is that people have long since decided that they want a smaller government, and it's why I'd rather move to the Czech Republic than live under a leader like Huckabee.

We've seen the distasters of large government not only societally with the McCarthy witch-hunts and the recent dismemberment of perfectly efficient parts of the military by the homophobia in this administration, but also economically. Reagan ran a power based government and introduced some of the worst taxation plans (if not THE WORST) to pay for it, causing him to run up a deficet without even going to war. (something this administration would have done, but decided to go to war on top of that)

The idea of a liberal Government (that I'm very glad Joe mentioned) is one that alot of the people want, but they want it for all of the wrong reasons. Obviously I'm biased, being Libertarian (and vehemently pro-Ron Paul), but it is my personal understanding through years of economic study that the American economy has done the best when the government has given businesses an opportunity to make money and absolutely nothing more.

I will second the sentiment that Hitler and Tojo ended the depression. Without WWII, the efficiency of production in this country wouldn't have seen another spike like that until the 90's in silicon valley (which never would have happened without WWII, but that's another story altogether).

The point is, whether you are a Democrat or a Republican or an independent, Mike Huckabee = Bad.

Not only his morally shady, the most religious dogmatic of all of the past presidents and completely in the dark when it comes to the way fundamental sciences in this country work, but he has no experience that would benefit him as president. He has offered no substantial insight into his foreign policy except to toe the party line and he has shown no indication that he would have a clue how to balance a budget.

In my personal opinion, at least Tommy Thompson knows something about health care. Beyond that, they're both equally terrible candidates.

9:15 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home