The RNC's Donkey In My E-mail

The polls will be opening in 33 or so hours from the time of this posting, depending upon where you live. This makes it an optimal time for the Republican National Committee to send out an electronic GOTV fundraising message -- which they just did. The e-mail, signed by former governor and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, begins this way (emphasis added):

When you wake up on November 3rd, will you be able to say that you did everything you could to stop the Obama Democrats' leftist agenda and return American government to the American people?

Mike Huckabee is calling out the "leftist agenda" of the left? Let's take a look at Huckabee's agenda over the years:

Perhaps Pat Toomey says it best:

He’s every bit as bad, and you don’t have to just take our word for it. Jonah Goldberg, you and your fellow editors at National Review, Bob Novak, and John Fund — to name just a few conservative writers — agree that Mike Huckabee is no conservative. You can read the Club’s white paper on our website, but here is a quick summary of Huckabee’s worst hits. According to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, the average Arkansas tax burden increased 47% over Huckabee’s tenure. Huckabee supported (in chronological order) a sales tax hike; gas and diesel fuel tax hikes; another sales tax hike; a cigarette tax hike; a nursing home bed tax; another sales tax hike; an income surcharge tax; a tobacco tax hike; taxes on Internet access; and higher beer taxes. Huckabee also oversaw a 50-percent increase in spending; happily signed a minimum wage increase and encouraged national Republicans to do the same; favors a national smoking ban, farm subsidies, and a federally mandated arts and music curriculum; opposes private school choice; and employs class-warfare and protectionist language on the campaign trail. Huckabee calls himself an economic conservative in the mold of Ronald Reagan, but the above list doesn’t sound like either.

Huckabee's agenda seems fairly leftist, reminding me of the following German idiom: Ein Esel schimpft den anderen Langohr. Appropriately, this roughly translates as follows: One donkey insults another by calling him Longears.

I've noted in the past that the GOP needs libertarians more than libertarians need the GOP. To some degree, they've listened and libertarians have now been welcomed back to the table -- and we are even allowed to use the front door from time to time.

Even larger than the libertarian movement is the Tea Party movement, which is powerful enough to make or break the GOP.  Comprised of roughly the same percentages of conservatives and libertarians, the Tea Party movement is nearly 100 percent fiscally conservative.

As a libertarian and a Tea Party activist, I feel like the payment I've received for my hard work over the last two years has been a slap in the face by Michael Steele.

The Republican Party is poised to enjoy considerable electoral gains Tuesday night. In choosing their GOTV poster child, the RNC could have picked someone liked by the people who are going to sweep the Republican Party back into power. Chris Christie and Jim DeMint serve as great examples of elected officials with high positives throughout the movement.

By choosing Mike Huckabee as tonight's electronic spokesman, the Republican National Committee has reaffirmed their commitment to their power-over-politics big-government principles.

Blogging the Right Thing: Quit Treating Snakebites

This is Huckabee’s chapter in Do the Right Thing is on Health Care which he’d hoped to make a major focus of the campaign, but found his efforts were stymied by game show hosts debate moderators who kept questions on health care out in favor of what interested them.

Huckabee writes, “Frankly, it never occurred to me that any American family was sitting around their dinner table having a discussion about whether the next President might consider a pardon for Scooter Libby. But I was dead certain that most families were talking about the runaway costs of their health care expenses.”

Huckabee took flak from some libertarians for a statement that Congress would solve the problem if they were told either to give th American people the Health Care Congress has or to accept the type of health insurance many Americans had. Huckabee was not calling for government control of health care, only point to the fact that Washington was insulated from dealing with the health care system.

The Huckabees were not. When leaving the Governor’s Mansion, Huckabee had to purchase more expensive insurance policy that increased when his wife took a leave of absence from her job with the Red Cross and had to be added. His daughter faced $12,000 in medical bills over a relatively minor procedure.

Huckabee gets to a point that many Libertarians will nod their head at. Access isn’t the problem. First of all, the 47 million uninsured cited by Democrats, only 15 million are truly unable to afford health insurance or the bills that will follow.

Huckabee argues the problem is systemic and finds the Democrats’ solution of adding more people problematic in light of what he sees as the underlying problem. Huckabee writes, “simply giving an unhealthy population access to our current health care system and not addressing the underlying crisis only makes problems worse. Our current system is upside down, built entirely on the notion that we should interven when catastrophic illness hits, rather than aim to prevent illnesses in the first place.”

 Huckabee is vitally concerned with chronic disease which is rattling our healthcare system. Chronic disease is generally caused by activities such as overeating, smoking, or lack of excercise.  Huckabee finds prevention to be key.

He’s clear that he doesn’t think government’s role is to lay down harsh rules, to the “sugar sheriff” or the “grease police.”  But that there needs to be fundamental culture changes beginning with the way doctors are trained (for example lack of training in treating diabetes as well as a focus on prevention.

Huckabee throws innovative ideas out. Huckabee’s own efforts to offer incentives to health and provide greater opportunities for state employees to excercise (by offering mid-day excercise breaks) and creating a points system that allowed employees to earn points for losing weight, taking walks, and not smoking in order to earn personal leave time.

Huckabee had the policies evaluated by outside company that found the polices led to $3400 per  year in extra productivity from the employees who took part in them.

Huckabee explains why real solutions to health care don’t really happen politically. Most politicians want to focus on things they can get fixed within their term of office, and health care isn’t one of them. Democrats promise health care plans that create programs as if a program is going to fix the problem. Real solutions require more innovation and more than just government.

Huckabee has often mused as to why health insurance companies don’t cover preventive measures. In Doing the Right Thing, he explains the reason as told him by Insurance Company Presidents. With people changing jobs so often and changing insurance companies every time they switch jobs, it doesn’t make sense for insurance companies to cover prevention because the benefits of prevention will be reaped by another insurance company. Huckabee says that it’s time to move away from the employer based policy to a consumer-driven one.

Huckabee writes, ” Think about it: we don’t expect our employer to ensure our cars or homes, so why should employers insure our bodies. If we bought the insurance and were likely to keep the same carrier as we transitioned to other employers, the carriers would then have a clear incentive to take extraordinary measures to keep us healthy.”

Chapter 11 is incredibly outside the box and it brings a very interesting perspective to the health care debate.

Regaining the trust of the small government wing of the GOP

Eric Kohn writes:

Right now, if the Democrats proposed a bill to burn down the Capitol, the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument, the Republicans would compromise and agree to phase it in over 5 years. Is there any doubt this would have been the paradigm under John McCain? 

If Republicans ever hope to win back the libertarian bloc and reengage activism among fiscal conservatives, they need to take a look at some some potential leaders and possible presidential candidates they've been ignoring for the most part.

At this moment, Mike Huckabee is suggesting the purging of believers in small government from the party, calling libertarianism "a heartless, callous, soulless type of economic conservatism."

If some in the party get their way, Huckabee won't have to worry about internal competition from what he calls the  “real threat” to the Republican Party: “libertarianism masked as conservatism.”

Then there is Georgia's Saxby Chambliss, who is in the midst of a major fight to retain his Senate seat.  Things might have gone fairly well for Saxby if he hadn't voted for the bailout, opening the door for his opponent to be able to make this statement:

It's classic Saxby Economics - $700 billion for Wall Street, while Georgia families get stuck with the bill. That's just wrong.

While Saxby was busy justifying his bailout vote to unsympathetic Georgia voters, Libertarian Allen Buckley was placing signs around the state billing himself as the only fiscal conservative in the race.  If the DSCC hadn't made the mistake of going after Saxby on the Fair Tax in the heart of Neal Boortz territory, it's possible that Martin (who distanced himself from the ads) might have won.  As it turned out, the Libertarian forced a runoff which now has significant national implications.

Now comes the really laughable part.  Up until Election Day, media and local conversation (I was working in Atlanta until a week after the general election) about the race was centered around fiscal issues -- and primarily about the bailout.  So who does Saxby bring into the state to help him campaign? "Tax Hike Mike" Huckabee and bailout enthusiast John McCain.

It's not just the people, either. One also needs to look at the organizations closely affiliated with the GOP.  As one example, the NRA just joined in the flap over the Obama transition team asking potential appointees about their gun ownership and registration habits.  This is the same NRA who turned their back on one of their own board members to endorse someone with an abysmal Second Amendment record and an adversarial relationship to the NRA. How are people to trust an organization like this when they just chose politics over principle with respect to McCain?

If the GOP ever hopes to regain the trust of conservatives and the votes of libertarians, they need to be looking at people like Mark Sanford, Jeff Flake or even Gary Johnson -- as opposed to Mike Huckabee, John McCain and Saxby Chambliss.

To Earn Trust, Republicans Must Embrace Core Principles

Promoted. -Patrick

Let me begin by thanking Patrick, Soren, Jon, and the guys at the Next Right for understanding the importance that the internet can play in shaping the future of our party. As Republicans, we should be using forums such as blogs to shape and mold policy.

I have had a front-row seat to the Republican Party over the past several years. I've been a volunteer, a grass-roots candidate for governor, a lieutenant-governor nominee, chaired Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's presidential campaign in Iowa and was an elected delegate to this year's National Convention.

This has provided me a unique perspective of the status of the Republican Party. Paraphrasing Jerry McGuire, "I've been to the puppet show, and I've seen the strings.

There are many fingers being pointed and many excuses being offered in the Republican locker room after the staggering 2008 losses. As a result, we are searching for leaders in the Iowa Senate, the Iowa House and for Iowa's Republican Party. In addition, nonelected leaders are giving explanations for the party's demise and offering prescriptions for the future. So, please permit me to offer mine.

Jesus Christ, whom many Republicans claim to follow, summoned his followers to be either hot or cold toward Him, because a "lukewarm" commitment makes Him want to vomit. I believe this accurately reflects the mood of voters in the past several elections where Republicans have witnessed consecutive defeats.

We have followed the misguided advice of "experts" to abandon our principles and move to the middle so we can supposedly win. In essence, we have become "lukewarm" on life, on marriage, on the Second Amendment, on limited government, on balanced budgets, on lower taxes, on parental rights in educating and raising children, on faith, on family and on freedom. The net result is that voters have spit us out of their mouths.

Republicans are losing because the voters don't trust them. The first key to any leadership position is trust. No one cares how competent someone is if they can't be trusted. The last thing any state or entity needs is a competent liar.

The party's platform is clearly pro-life, but we fill out surveys and use focus-tested words to validate our overriding interest in winning versus a sincere commitment to core principles. Republicans rev up their base by declaring marriage to be between one man and one woman only to walk away from the issue when it poses a threat to personal ambition. The result is no trust ... no vote.

Republicans promise to balance budgets, but citizens are strapped with the largest deficit in history. Republicans passionately discuss limited government but deliver Medicare D, No Child Left Behind, stimulus plans and state value funds. The result is no trust ... no vote.

Some in the GOP are bold enough to refer to their party as "God's Own Party," indicating unswerving commitment to faith, family and freedom. Even so, voters witness disgusting text messages to young pages, solicitation of prostitutes, adulterous affairs, improper advances in airport restrooms and acceptance of money in exchange for power. The result is no trust ... no vote.

The "elite" politicos and Iowa's dwindling Republican establishment are now convening committees and strategy sessions to advise their "flock" to abandon the party's principles and move even further to the middle if they hope to win again. The voter sees and tastes the "lukewarm" and compromising attempts to gain positions and power. The result is no trust, and the voter, like Christ, wants to throw up.

If Republicans are to win again, they must authentically embrace their core principles and effectively communicate a compelling message of bold-color conservatism that inspires faith, family and freedom.

Each year, we hear more and more praise for President Ronald Reagan. So, let's embrace the unyielding words of our party's icon when he said, "Let us raise our bold colors high." And, for those who are willing to exchange their values for shallow victories, as Reagan said, "let them go their way!"

HUCKABEE VS HUFFINGTON: The Pennsylvania Debate 10/6

That's not a hypothetical matchup folks, it happened this week on Monday night.

It didn't leave much of a paper trail in the MSM, But Huckabee and Huffington engaged in a vigorous debate as surrogates for McCain and Obama in Pennsylvania on the night before the second presidential debate.

On paper, given the clearly polar opposite natures of the worldviews these folks represent , this debate could have resulted in some serious fireworks, (which I'm sure was the intended appeal of the event) but Huckabee and Huffington rose to the occasion with a civil but vigourous debate on the issues. To be honest, there were more on target, real honest to God townhall style questions answered in this debate than in the presidential one which followed Tuesday night

The debate took place before a dinner for business owners and was telecast on t.v. and radio across the state. Live feedback from phone in commentators after the debate revealed an appreciation for the civil nature of the debate, and showcased a number of undecideds who now lean McCain after Huckabee's sterling performance as a surrogate in this context.

Click on the 'Election 08' tab on the following link to view the video of the debate in its entirity. You will need quicktime to view it.

There is no doubt in my mind that Huckabee could have gone toe to toe with Obama in these presidential debates, wiped the floor and sqeezed out the rag. As it is, McCain is well advised to continue to use him in a surrogate capacity in those blue collar swing states.

If anyone out there knows how to get this debate recorded in a format that can be loaded to You Tube... Do it!! I'd love to be able to email links that may be more user friendly.


Looking to the Future

Crossposted at Right Minds

I can remember the exact moment I stopped listening to Sean Hannity. In was in November of last year; he was discussing the presidential candidates. Evidently, he felt he was being too hard on one of them, because he blurted out the opinion that the whole group were a great bunch of candidates and that he would happily support whichever one won the nomination. It was, of course, obvious to any rational observer that the GOP was running an absolutely dismal crop of candidates (the three frontrunners at the time were Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, and [cringe] Mike Huckabee), and that the winner would be the best of a bad lot.
Fortunately, the best man, at least from an electoral point of view (can you really imagine Mitt Romney competing with Barack Obama?), won the nomination, but John McCain didn’t have much competition. Mitt Romney must be the most uncharismatic man in history—he managed to get the entire conservative punditocracy on his side, but still found a way to lose convincingly. Mike Huckabee never ran a serious campaign; besides, as Frank J. at IMAO pointed out, his name sounds like that of a cartoon family’s dog. Rudy Giuliani was a less likeable, liberal version of John McCain, and his campaign really did (as Joe Biden pointed out—he has his moments) consist of a noun, a verb, and 9/11. And Fred Thompson, though staunchly conservative, and my favorite candidate, never ran a real campaign either. The Republicans ran a weak slate of candidates this election, and it is a miracle that they actually have a real chance of keeping the White House.
Fortunately for the GOP, its prospects in 2012 look much brighter. There are a great many talented young conservatives who will be of the right age to run in 2012—as well as some veterans who may be able to use four years experience to become stronger candidates.
Sarah Palin is the obvious choice for the 2012 nominee—she is attractive, smart, and conservative, besides being the next in line for the GOP nomination, which is important. It’s hard to imagine a scenario—unless McCain decides to run again, which is unlikely—in which she isn’t the nominee. And she would be a good, maybe even brilliant—choice.
Bobby Jindal would be another excellent choice. He is, perhaps, the most intelligent governor in America, and he conservative credentials are second to none. He’s competent, too—thankfully, Hurricane Ike wasn’t as damaging as was originally feared, but his response to the crisis was exceptional. And like Palin, he is telegenic (if not as good-looking as Palin is) and articulate, both of which are advantages for a candidate following the incoherent Bush and the mumbling McCain.
In fact, Jindal may be the GOP’s best hope for the future. His conservative credentials are probably stronger than Palin’s, and his experience is much greater. Rush Limbaugh has called Jindal the “next Reagan”—and he could be right.
Mitt Romney just couldn’t get anyone to like him in the primaries—moderates thought he was too conservative, while conservatives thought he was too moderate. Both were right—Romney had distinctly moderate views through most of his career, then exhibited an abrupt rightward shift when he ran for president. Nobody anywhere ever got excited about Romney (except, apparently, Michigan voters). But if he spends the next four years actively promoting conservative causes, and building conservative “street cred” (a term which somehow sounds so incongruous when associated with Mitt Romney), he could very well become a formidable candidate in 2012.
Mike Huckabee might have been the candidate most hated by conservatives—with good reason. He was never a very serious candidate; he based his campaign around a smile and a shoeshine, a combination that somehow very nearly got him the nomination. True, he has his conservative lapses, but like Romney, four years spent pushing conservative causes could endear him to many conservatives. And given Huckabee’s immense charisma, he could do in 2012 what he couldn’t do in 2008—take the Republican nomination, and maybe even the presidency.
There is, of course, one more possible GOP nominee in 2012—John McCain, provided he wins in 2008. True, it’s hard to imagine a 76-year-old man deciding to run for reelection—but then, John McCain has always gone against the odds. And if his approval ratings are high…well, he might as well go for it.
Jindal and Palin would be fantastic nominees, McCain would be acceptable, and Romney and Huckabee have promise. It might seem premature to start thinking about 2012 before the 2008 election is even completed—but the people involved are thinking about it, and conservatives should be as well. If it is anything like 2008, the process will begin in just a couple of years, and conservatives should be ready.


A Democrat's Nightmare

Crossposted with authors permission from:!F3D4C1BC1D8B0D91!1171.entry

I don't get how people don't get it. Hopefully Mccain will.


It was reported last year that the Republican candidate who most worried the Democrats was Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. The Democratic Strategists must be relieved that his name hasn't been mentioned on McCain's short lists. But let's take a look at the type of thing that the Democratic consultants are probably very afraid of.


Friday, August 29th 4:30 AM

Dear Diary,

I just woke up from the scariest dream ...


When I went to bed last night, I was in a great mood. Our conference was awesome and the party was starting to come together. Barack gave an incredible speech. And the polls showed we were getting a good bump out of the convention.


And then I went back to the hotel and fell asleep. And I dreamed that I was watching television and watching McCain announce his running mate. We had been preparing for Romney (we put together the coolest ad). But we also were ready for the other members of the short list. For each of those people, we had talking points about why they were horrible picks and would continue the Bush tradition. I dreamed I was staring straight at the screen when they unveiled McCain's Veep.


And then I saw MIKE HUCKABEE with John McCain. Aw, shucks. The guy we weren't expecting. And I screamed for a minute like I was Howard Dean. I was really scared.


But then I thought to myself - "yes we can." We can deal with this. And so I went to the office to prepare some talking points on Huckabee. But that was even scarier.


I searched through all of Huckabee's comments to find something bad he said about McCain so that we could put out our own ad just like the Republicans did to us last week. But I came up empty. He never said anything bad about McCain.


Then we tried to connect him to the Bush Administration so that we could show why he'd be part of a second Bush term. But that was even more frustrating. He ran a state and didn't have anything to do with Iraq, the deficit, the national debt, or our image abroad. We looked around for how much he voted with Bush. But because he was the only person running who wasn't in the Senate, he didn't even have the opportunity to vote with or against Bush. Arrggh.


We tried to make some arguments about how McCain/Huckabee would not help Americans with health care. But even that didn't work. Huckabee created a program that offered health insurance to poor children. He cut the number of uninsured Arkansans so that it was a quarter less than the national average. He even lost a hundred pounds and saved money on drugs himself because he didn't need diabetes medication anymore. This dream kept getting worse by the minute.


We were going to make an ad to attack all Republicans because of the Hurricane Katrina disaster. But even that didn't work because Huckabee took money out of his own state's treasury to help house the evacuees from neighboring Louisiana. He even gave free dialysis machines to the evacuees who were sick.


We tried to point out how the Republicans haven't reached out to black voters. But we couldn't even do that because Huckabee got half the black vote in Arkansas, even with Bill and Hillary Clinton helping his opponent. And then a bunch of black Pastors and church groups got together and (tremble) said they were going to vote for him.


Since Joe Biden has been in politics for so long, we wanted to compare our Veep against their Veep and show how much experience our guy has. But then someone pointed out that Huckabee was the only person who had actually run a government and has a longer tenure than any governor of either party. We were hoping Biden would be able to beat the Pub's Veep in a debate. But Huck won the debates easily. He even told funnier jokes.


We tried to talk about all the personal scandals that Republicans have been involved in over the past couple of years. But when we tried to pull up dirt on Huckabee, we came up ... empty. EMPTY!? He's been married to the same woman for 34 years, his kids love him and he's stayed out of trouble.


Our last hope was that those talk show radio hosts would help us out, the way they did during the primaries. But it turned out that even though their guy didn't get picked, they still disliked our nominee so much that they started being fair to Huckabee.


And because McCain and Huckabee seemed to have so much fun campaigning together, McCain started looking happier and more relaxed on the stump.


I started to cry. I knew we were probably going to lose the election. And then I woke up.


Gosh! I'm still shaking. I'm just glad they haven't realized that they've been ignoring the best candidate. That was TOO close. I'm just glad it was just a dream.


For the Sake of Country, Let it be Huckabee

Crossposted with permission of author, from a forum comment at ‘Justgrace’ speaks for us all. It’s about more than a man, it’s about our concerns for our country and its future.

We are not 'self righteous,' fanatics, or bigoted.  We have just learned the lessons of history. When America moves away from the moral boundary stones set by our spiritual heritage, we get deeply and tragically lost. Mike Huckabee has awoken in us a desire to be the somebody, who does the something to make a difference in getting our county back on track. I hope John McCain will give him the chance to influence that many more lives.


I know we Huckabee supporters can get a little upset over the mistreatment of our candidate, and it is important to ask “why?”

Is it because he is such a nice guy, and we do not want him to be mistreated?

Is it because we have spent many of our hours and dollars trying to boost him in the polls, trying to get the word out about why Gov. Huckabee would be a great leader for our country, and so we are upset that our time might have been wasted and our sacrifices have been in vain?

Is it because we see the unfairness of how Mike Huckabee was overlooked by the Christian Right, and scoffed by the left, ignored by the media, and forsaken by the talk-show hosts?

I think the reason needs to be deeper for our support, and I believe in most cases it is. I also think that our disquiet is not motivated so much by anger at mistreatment as it is by anxiety for the future of our country. We are concerned about our children and grandchilden’s future.

Huckabee supporters are deeply concerned with the changes in the United States of America we see, statistics that reveal a decline in almost every area: our schools, our children’s moral training, (rises in) juvenile delinquency, our social problems among the black population where the father is largely absent and the little boys with no father presence in their lives eventually end up in prison. We see the decline, where little girls grow up to be abused and not honored as ladies, where husbands forsake marriage vows, and where now wives are doing the same. Most of the time, it seems no one is home, keeping the “home fires” burning, since we have to (or choose to be) absent as parents. The family is in shambles, the schools often are also, the burden of taxation is almost unbearable, and atop that we wonder just how secure we are from terrorists threats. We see too-little and too-slow a turn-around in abortions and practices where human life is allowed to be cheapened.

Along came a remarkable candidate, a governor from Arkansas, who we saw had been successful in addressing and changing many social and economic issues in his own state. He brought hope to the people of his state through honest, responsible government and an “I care” and “We can do” attitude. He was able to procure our faith in his words, and reawaken our dreams for the America we used to be so proud of. While we still love our country, there is also a regret and deep sense of loss that conservatives see in looking at how our country is declining in many areas.

I think one of the most basic reasons we “Huckabeans” have been captured by the message and the man called Mike Huckabee is because we have been so frustrated and deeply concerned with the direction politics in this country has gone. Now that we have gotten acquainted with this unusually fresh, honest, self-sacrificial, caring candidate, we are not ready to let go of the idea that “he is the man our country needs. He is the man for the season!”

If you will, we see in him the “real change” in politics everyone is talking about; he is the one who understands the wrong direction in which our nation is headed, left vs. right, downhill verses up, and he wants to head it in a new direction: “vertically.”

So when people say, “You Huckabee fans are just disgruntled fanatics,” we know better. Yes, we are frustrated. The path that Gov. Huckabee has taken has not been the easiest, not paved with streets of gold or the accolades of the GOP or much of the press, but it is still a positive, hopeful race. We just don’t know how God in His sovereignty will allow turns of events, but we pray that the time will come soon for Gov. Mike Huckabee to lead this nation forward. We want to give him the chance to lead and put his ideals in place. We want him to follow his dream, and we want to be right there, cheering him on and helping make a change for the good of America and the world.

We conservatives are often people of faith, who are quite distressed to see a nation built on Judeo-Christian principles turning its back on the very things that made this nation great — “faith, family, and freedom.”

These are the standard American principles for which we were historically known, the things for which the Pilgrims, the Puritans, the original thirteen colonies stood and died. These were the principles our country grappled with and rediscovered, even through the dark blotches on our character, for which we have had to make amends — such things as the Salem witch trials, the mistreatment of the Native Americans, and the toleration of slavery in certain states of our country. Even during these dark times of our history, there were good people who did not lose sight of the vision of America as the “land of the free and the home of the brave.”

Deeper than momentary disappointments of “party” or efforts lost, we have a greater reason for our urgency in praying that our man wins. For the “sake of our country,” we want Mike Huckabee to win the nomination for Vice President and later for President.

To this end we pray often. For the country we love. For our families whom we cherish. For true freedom with responsibility. For the beacon of light America can be to the world.



The scoop on Huckabee's new Fox show

In a recent 45 minute podcast interview with CATALYST, the former governor of Arkansas and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee chatted about a wide range of subjects from his experiences in pastoring and politics, to his plans for the immidiate future. The full interview can be heard at the link, and plays on Windows media.

Of particular interest to fans and foes alike, should be the innovative format of his new show on Fox, scheduled to begin airing at the end of September, (just in time for the start of the general election campaign)

According to Huckabee in the interview, the show will feature a live studio audience, and a format that allows for participation on the internet as well.

Huckabee has relaunched his personal website with a new look and format, completely separate from the site that his PAC operates, HuckPAC. It appears that this site will play some role in the interactive net component of his show.

The news of these plans may come as a bittersweet pill for many to swallow. It would seem to indicate that Huckabee REALLY isn't waiting around for that veep phonecall, a dissapointment to many of his hardcore supporters. But one could argue that a show with such an unprescedented format in our reality tv. obsessed nation, at the height of the political silly season, has explosive potential.

Huckabee promises that the show will not showcase the usual punditry of the talking heads, but rather an open an honest discussion with and about the concerns of the American people. Essentially, a live town hall meeting once a week for as long as the show is a Fox staple.

I would suggest that those waiting for Mike Huckabee to fade quietly into the long, dark political night, have a long wait on their hands. Huckabee's light is just starting to shine.

In Huckabee's own words on his future in politics, from the interview, " I think there's some fight left in me!"

You go Gov!

National Review Does Not Speak For Me


National Review is set this Friday to release the names of four people it views as unacceptable Vice-Presidential Candidates: Tom Ridge, Charlie Crist, Joe Lieberman, and Mike Huckabee, and frankly I could care less.
In December, I listened to and joined in the DC echo-chamber that slammed Mike Huckabee mercilessly. I fed on the constant negative drumbeat of National Review and their relentless assaults on Arkansas’ former Governor. I bought into it, I regurgitated it.
I never bothered to look into the facts, particularly in regards to the charges against Mike Huckabee’s fiscal record. If I had, I would have found out that he had two court rulings come out against his state that forced increases in Medicaid and Education, and that on top of that he faced a legislature that was at least 70% Democrat every year he was in office and could override his veto by a simple majority. I wonder which Huckabee critic could have done more for conservative values than Huckabee under those circumstances.
If this past election cycle taught us nothing, it taught us that bias exists in the conservative media. The one-sided attacks on Mike Huckabee last December were not only unfair, they allowed the rise of John McCain to the Republican nomination, as the National Review-anointed leader of the Conservative movement surrendered on February 7th after having won only one competitive primary.
Conservative defeat is the legacy of National Review in the 2008 campaign. Why bother listening to them? Last week, I did a podcast in which I began to talk about some of the activities of John McCain, the nominee that obsessive huckacritics pushed over the top by becoming the echo chamber of groups like National Review and the Club for Growth and I wept for what I helped to bring about.
I feel as Heritage Foundation Founder Paul Weyrich did when he rose to speak to the National Policy Council to confess, “Friends, before all of you and before Almighty God, I want to say I was wrong.”
Over the years, conservative magazines have ceased to speak to common people and explain how and why conservative ideas can make our country better. Instead, the magazines are full of intellectual navel-gazing that no one outside of the conservative movement cares one whit about.
They missed, as we all did, the grassroots movement that was Huck’s Army: thousands of grassroots activists producing miracle wins on little money. They missed the optimism and faith in America that Mike Huckabee exuded? Why? He graduated from school they never heard of, he was an Evangelical, came from the rural South, and didn’t embrace Darwinism as unalienable truth.
There is much of the establishment conservative movement that represents conservative beltway elitism. There time is ending.
There was a time when the New York Times was a Christian-owned newspaper that railed against the evils of abortion and even called it medical malpractice. There was a time when the motto of Harvard was, “For Christ and the church.”
These institutions have become shadows of their former selves, enemies of the causes for which they once existed, but truth lives on. It does not live in the hearts of the Wall Street crowd, beltway political manipulators, or self-righteous pundits, it lives in the hearts of people we never hear from at the national level.
They’re people who work hard, earning $12 an hour if that. They’re the people Barack Obama thinks cling to religion and guns out of bitterness. They’re the people that National Review thinks only refused to back Mitt Romney because of anti-Mormon bigotry. They’re people the left scoffs at for voting against their own economic interests.
But these people really believe in America, and that it’s a place where they can still make a better life for themselves and their children. They believe in a God who still governs in the affairs of men. These are the people who National Review disdains.
So, National Review can feel free to lump Mike Huckabee in with liberal Republicans like Tom Ridge and Charlie Crist, and even a Scoop Jackson Democrat like Joe Lieberman. But it is they who are missing the next great wave of conservatives. 
Beyond this dark moment in the history of American Conservatism, I see glimmers of hope in those who are heeding the challenge of Alex and Brett Harris to “do hard things.” I see it in people across this country who will bare the battle in the heat of the day for the good of their country. There is hope for our country. It just won’t be found in places you’d expect like the offices of National Review.  


Syndicate content