The American Spectator

Print Email

Text Size

Eminentoes

(Page 2 of 2)

What disconcerts is Huckabee's gut level response. Instead of either defending his record or admitting to a mistake or challenging the views of the Club he said this: "The Club for Greed, I call them. They hate that. Oh, they hate it. And I enjoy giggin' them about it..."

Hello? Is the Republican Party seriously considering nominating a candidate whose instinctive response to criticism from Reaganites is to use the favorite code word of Reagan's enemies? Does Huckabee really believe that Reaganomics represents a philosophy of greed? Does he agree that the 1980s was "The Decade of Greed"?

This is the rhetoric that is being religiously flogged on an hourly basis by Democrat John Edwards over on the class warfare side of the divide. Edwards, who conspicuously excludes wealthy trial lawyers from the greed label, is busy trying to convince Americans that they live not in the opportunity society of Reagan and supply-side champion and former GOP vice-presidential nominee Jack Kemp but rather in "two Americas." One super-rich, the other poverty stricken, with the first group routinely exploiting the second. The Edwards world-view is decidedly far-distant from Reaganomics, and is almost never given voice without using the very word that Huckabee employed: greed.

If you think conservatives rebelled over President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court because she was not seen as a serious conservative, you've seen nothing next to the reaction that would greet a President Huckabee as he abandoned Reaganomics in favor of some sort of Edwards-lite economic program.

One does not have to be a member of the Club for Growth (as, for the record, I am not) to understand the important work they are about. Both Toomey and his predecessor and founder of the Club, economist Stephen Moore, are, among other attributes, serious policy wonks who have devoted a good part of their respective careers to Reagan's economic legacy. It is understandable that candidate Huckabee could be irritated with their criticism. The impression he leaves is that at a gut-check level he has contempt for their economics.

Ronald Reagan's economics.

The economics that were the engine fueling the success of the Reagan Revolution from revitalizing the American economy to ending the Cold War.

Huckabee rival Mitt Romney has correctly said that the key to victory is the three-legged stool that is the coalition of economic conservatives, social conservatives and national security conservatives. All of Huckabee's major competitors have eagerly sought the support of all three groups. With a single remark Huckabee has raised a major red flag to his candidacy. Worse still was his gleeful admission that pegging a group of Reaganites with the "greed" label was a "giggin'" that really brought him a personal level of enjoyment.

Yikes.

IN THE 1884 ELECTION, as Republican James G. Blaine was poised for victory over Democrat Grover Cleveland, a Blaine supporter cracked at a prominent dinner that Cleveland's party was the party of "rum, Romanism and rebellion." The remark backfired on the spot and cost Blaine the election.

Presumably no one is more aware of the implications of Huckabee's expressed sentiments than Ed Rollins, Reagan's 1984 campaign manager who piloted the Gipper to his 49-state win over Walter Mondale. Rollins recently signed on as Huckabee's senior strategist. (Full disclosure; Rollins was my boss in the 1984 campaign and hired me to work at the White House. He is also a friend.) But as Rollins and every other adviser to a candidate knows, it is the candidate himself -- or herself -- who is ultimately responsible for delivering the central message of a campaign and, if elected, an administration. All of the five GOP frontrunners have prominent conservatives behind them, like Rollins first class people with first class conservative political minds. Yet all are dealing with principals who are making one group or another in the Reagan coalition nervous as to their intent on central issues like immigration, abortion, judicial appointments, tax cuts, or national security.

One hopes that for his part Huckabee can either seriously address the issues raised by the Club for Growth, or at a minimum try to undo the perception he is creating that he is some sort of GOP version of John Edwards. The fall election will be tough enough as it is. The idea troubles that the nominee of the conservative party could be someone who fails to understand that his apparent scorn for "Wall Street" could resonate negatively with the almost 50 percent of the American population who are now shareholders -- because of Ronald Reagan. Does Huckabee really believe that all these millions of people are therefore "greedy"? That economic growth as exemplified by Reaganomics is nothing more than a show-stopping parade of excess by out of control Middle Americans? If in fact in his heart- of-hearts he has some sort of contempt for the Reagan agenda -- and the Reagan economic accomplishments that restored America to its place as the shining city on a hill -- Governor Huckabee will soon find himself doing his best to balance on a stool that is missing a leg.

No giggin'.

topics:
Taxes, Health Care, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Economics, Abortion, Law, Supreme Court, NATO, Socialism, Immigration, Oil