By George Neumayr on 1.9.08 @ 12:08AM
How is it that the bar of conservative entry for a presidential nominee lowers for the Romneys and McCains, then rises for the Huckabees?
Against an immutable standard of conservatism, Mike Huckabee is
hardly impeccable. I find some of what he says silly and
unpersuasive (for example, his support for Global Warming theory).
But the explosion of snide remarks directed at him from many in the
conservative movement strikes me as churlish and baldly
hypocritical. How is it that the bar of conservative entry for a
presidential nominee lowers for the Romneys and McCains, then rises
for the Huckabees?
Okay, he is a heterodox Republican on some issues. So what? Who
isn't amongst the leading contenders in this primary race? A few
years back I recall these anti-Huckabee purists lecturing
California conservatives on the need to support Arnold
Schwarzenegger over Tom McClintock. Now that McCain has won in New
Hampshire, we will soon see this very flexible definition of GOP
conservatism resurface and be told that electability trumps
all.
Much of the contempt for Huckabee is confusing, alternating
between descriptions of him as a socialist pansy and social
reactionary. Which is it? Is he too liberal for the GOP or too
conservative?
I suspect that the essential problem for some in the
conservative movement (as it was for establishment conservatives
pitted against Pat Buchanan in his race with Bob Dole in 1996)
isn't that Huckabee takes this or that heterodox position on issues
of economics/trade/foreign policy; it is that he's a transparent
Christian conservative. That they just can't abide, even as some of
these pundits tell conservatives to ignore religion with respect to
Mormonism.
Romney attended Planned Parenthood events, used to support state
financing of abortion and elements of the homosexual agenda; McCain
has derided in the past the Religious Right and taken any number of
fashionable liberal stances. But all of this can be quickly
excused. Woe to the Christian Republican, however, who talks about
the culture war, or -- brace yourself -- rejects Darwinism.
Whatever one thinks of that highly technical debate, that the
Wall Street Journal and GOP consultants like Mike Murphy
set up adherence to Darwinism as a litmus test for an "acceptable"
Republican nominee exposes the degree to which political
correctness has crept into the conservative movement. I don't blame
rank-and-file conservatives for increasingly ignoring the snobbish
sniffings of the George Wills.
Who cares what they think? How conservative are they? What new
liberal social innovation won't they soft-pedal? A "conservatism"
that involves a lot of pretentious throat-clearing and maybe the
recitation of a classical tag or two before coming to some PC
conclusion (that feminism is a net-gain for society, that Darwin
had it right, that gay civil unions aren't such a big deal, take
your pick) isn't worth much.
Run for the hills, Huckabee talked
about Christ during Christmas! Well, good for him. One of the
reasons for our flailing in the global war against the jihadists is
that we have become de-Christianized cowards. Does America need not
one but two wholly secularized parties?
HUCKABEE IS A Christian socialist, some say. Really? If he is a
Christian socialist, he is surely the first one to call for the
abolition of the Internal Revenue Service. Again, it is not at all
clear why rank-and-file conservatives are supposed to nod
vigorously whenever a McCain or Romney supporter calls Huckabee an
"economic liberal." At least he talks about eliminating income
taxes and capital gains taxes. Do they?
Romney's support for semi-socialized health care in
Massachusetts (which is almost indistinguishable from Obama's
scheme for the entire nation) is scarier to me than anything
Huckabee uncorked in Arkansas. And then there is John McCain's
opposition to Bush's tax cuts. Does that make him an unacceptable
economic liberal?
But Huckabee doesn't talk about Wall Street enough, some warn.
Good; Wall Street already sups at the government trough. If he cuts
off corporate welfare, I would be happy. It is about time somebody
talks about getting the ravenous, regulatory Leviathan state off
the backs of small businessmen, gun owners, and homeschooling
families, rather than waste time on Wall Street talking to fat cats
who vote for the Dems anyways.
But won't Huckabee shatter the conservative coalition? That
would be a little more persuasive if those saying this hadn't
shattered it themselves. The relative success of Ron Paul and
Huckabee is not a cause of the coalition's collapse but a
reflection of it. An excessively Wilsonian foreign policy has
divided defense conservatives; years of big spending has divided
economic conservatives; and a tepid, stalling social conservatism
has alienated moral ones.
Perhaps Huckabee can't rebuild this coalition. But he isn't
likely to weaken it any more than have his critics, and he may even
bring some long-disenchanted middle Americans into it.
topics:
Taxes, Foreign Policy, Trade, Health Care, John McCain, Economics, Business, Religion, Abortion, Global Warming, Conservatism, Unions