Snide Explosion - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Snide Explosion

Re: George Neumayr’s Standing Athwart Huckabee, Yelling Stop:

It is good to see George Neumayr again.
Dan Martin
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Mr. Neumayr is upset with conservatives for the “explosion of snide remarks” directed at presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. He admits that Huckabee is a “heterodox Republican on some issues,” but asks, “So what? Who isn]t amongst the leading contenders in this primary race?”

It’s no great compliment to Huckabee, nor reassuring to conservatives, to say he’s as bad as the other candidates.

Mr. Neumayr says we shouldn’t place electability above all things. He further claims that conservatives don’t like a “transparent Christian conservative” such as Huckabee, and then lists some of the failings of the other candidates. In addition, Huckabee’s rejection of Darwinism is supposedly too much for sophisticated conservatives.

I’d have to disagree. As a conservative and Christian, I reject the truth-claims of Darwinism. It might be said that 99 percent of scientists believe in the theory, and that conservatives shouldn’t disagree with scientists. My reply would be that 99 percent of scientists are insane — one percentage point behind mathematicians.

But in a political contest, that’s neither here nor there. I do not ask what a candidate thinks of Darwinian claims, any more than I care what he thinks of Britney Spears’s musical talents. Instead, I ask him what he thinks of originalism in interpreting the Constitution, what he thinks of abortion, immigration, defending America, and so on.

If conservatives don’t place electability high on their list of qualifications for a candidate, they’ll go the way of the libertarians, whose purism has led them into dalliances with dead-end third-partyism, neo-confederacy, and retreatism as the best way to impress terrorists. In short, irrelevancy.

I think the real problem here is that conservatives like Neumayr are looking for a Reagan, but are frustrated by what they end up with. (“Behold it was Leah.”) Wise conservatives, however, realize that a leader like Ronald Reagan only comes around once a century or so, though they still hold out hope that lightening will strike twice.

That probably won’t happen soon, so when none of the top contenders measures up, conservatives have to be pragmatic. Electability looms large as a criterion, as does personality. I think it was Leibniz who said that this is the best of all possible worlds. The deity could not have created a better world, given the materials he had to work with. He had to make do.

Politics is a lot like that, too.
C. V. Crisler
Gilbert, Arizona

Are we talking about the same Mr. Huckabee who used shameless, open religious bigotry (anti-Mormonism) to take his campaign from nowhere to winning Iowa? The same Mr. Huckabee whose supporters (not all) continue that shameless bigotry at every opportunity in blogs and churches around this country? And now Mr. Neumayr complains that conservatives aren’t accepting him because of OUR religious intolerance?
Jeffrey Lawrence

George Neumayr misses the point about why Mike Huckabee is controversial among Republicans. While Huckabee does advocate eliminating the IRS and the Estate Tax, he has governed as an economic liberal who raised taxes and increased spending while arguing for regulation of trade. He has run against the current administration’s “bunker mentality” in foreign policy, echoing the claims of liberals who accuse the president of failing to get the French and Germans to support regime change in Iraq (ignoring that he’d have to overcome their addiction to Oil-For-Food graft to do so) In taking these positions, he has alienated economic and neo-conservatives, two core groups in the Republican coalition. In addition, his promiscuous use of clemency has resulted in a Willie Horton-esque scandal in the Ricky Ray Rector case, and his ethical lapses, which bring unfortunate comparisons with that other Arkansas governor.

I have no doubt that Huckabee will be a better choice than Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, but that doesn’t mean that he’s the best choice among Republicans.
Mike Harris

I find it telling that supporters of Mike Huckabee cannot find any reason stronger than the one Neumayr uses in his pitiful piece, which is “well, he’s no worse than the other leading candidates.”

Aside from Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter, neither of whom appears to have even a slight chance to be nominated, the Republican Party has NO conservatives running.

As a conservative, evangelical, fundamentalist, Bible-believing Baptist myself, I would give self-identified Christians one word of warning about Mr. Huckabee. This man is the same brand of “Christian” as Jimmy Carter is. He has a very loose grip on reality.
Keith Kunzler
Arnold, Missouri

In reference to the article by George Neumayr about Mike Huckabee, finally someone has articulated what I have been grappling with the past few weeks. He is right-on regarding this double standard within the supposed “conservative” circles. The conservative pundits are quickly losing my attention with their, as George says, “pretentious throat-clearing.” Yes, what is up with that? They are beginning to seem more like social boars that care about nothing more than their own pocketbooks than anyone else’s.
Kirsten L. Villegas

I can’t let Mr. Neumayr get away with selling candidate Huckabee as less conservative than the other candidates; and I can’t let him get away with calling Huckabee a Christian “conservative.” I said months ago that Huckabee is the Christian Left — he is a liberal, notwithstanding his positions on abortion, homosexual marriage, and homeschooling. Even on the schooling, why isn’t he for school choice and making it affordable for parents to send their children to private schools? How is it possible for Huckabee to get the endorsement of the New Hampshire Education Association?

I don’t know why Mr. Neumayr focused on and spent his time on Huckabee as the person wronged with claims of not being conservative enough when there are two definite conservatives in the race who deserved his attention instead: Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter. Fred is my choice. He should have been selling one of the conservatives, not defending a liberal as one who is as conservatives as some of the other candidates.

I am one of those conservative fundamentalist Christian zealots that everyone loves to hate. As such, I found it terribly embarrassing for Christians when Huckabee the pastor played backdoor games with the religion issue. He had a great Christmas ad, mentioned the birth of Christ and everything else. The cross from the bookcase was nice, although Huckabee should have simply used a cross. He should have done what he did and then emphatically deny that there was any intent to show a cross – and that even his film crew was surprised by how it turned out. Sorry, not believable – not even from an ex-Baptist pastor. Then there was the incident when he told the reporter that he didn’t know much about Mormonism, and when the interview was over, deviously asked if Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil were brothers. Then there was the huge press conference he called to announce he would not show negative ads against Romney, and then proceeded to do just that on live television. These things were done by the one candidate who is constantly described as honest, trustworthy, genuine, real, and as even Mr. Neumayr does, a conservative Christian. Sorry, but Christian conservatives don’t act like that, and they don’t support the issues Mr. Huckabee does. The criticisms of him from most conservatives have nothing to do with his Christianity, belief in the Bible, dismissal of Darwinism, or anything else related to his beliefs. The complaints are about how he has governed and how he says he will govern.

I suspect the reason Neumayr decided to compare Huckabee with McCain and Romney is precisely because they are so similar. Yes, they have all flipped and flopped on some issues very important to conservatives, and that is why none of them will get my support. I don’t believe conservatives are willing to excuse McCain or Romney and their past positions, and neither should they excuse Huckabee’s. The primaries will soon tell. Mr. Neumayr should have spent his time to contrast Huckabee with someone like Thompson. Then it would have been clear to his audience that Huckabee is not a conservative.

The bottom line is, conservatives in Arkansas claim Huckabee destroyed both the Republican Party and conservative movement while governor; and that he governed in a backdoor and deceptive manner. I initially tried to support Huckabee, and still have tried to be fair to him all along, even to the point of excusing him on the tax issues and the myriad of ethical claims made against him while governor. However, I cannot excuse his true position on border security and illegal immigration; his 1,033 pardons and commutations of sentences for convicted felons handed down by judges and juries; his utter lack of knowledge on foreign policy and national security and how the real world works; his desire to close Guantanamo; the fact he is so against school choice he got the endorsement of NHEA; his strange and inordinate focus on music and arts in K – 12 education when students need discipline and the three R’s; his belief in global warming and the need to spend money to correct it; his support for the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas concerning sodomy; and I believe he certainly will raise taxes to pay for all of those instruments for all of those children playing them from K -12.

Think of the upgrades as the children get older, or when they change their interest from one musical instrument to another. The cost of that one issue that appears so strangely important to Huckabee, will be staggering. Hey, and to think I gave Huckabee a pass on the tax issues because Arkansas is a poor state and they needed funding for books and other things for K – 12 education, as he explains it. Silly me — and silly you Mr. Neumayr. You need to realize, as I have, that Huckabee is every bit the smooth talker and is as politically skillful as Bill Clinton.

Unfortunately, he, like Clinton, is not a conservative and has trouble with the facts/truth.
David Tomaselli

The bar for conservatism hasn’t been lowered for any candidate. It, like the teachings of Jesus and the U.S. Constitution, is a constant. The only people in the Republican primaries who meet the bar for conservatism are Fred Thompson and Ron Paul.

Saying you are a conservative and marketing a lot of newly adopted conservative positions don’t make someone a conservative. I certainly admire Huckabee’s unrelenting pro-life history, but that doesn’t make him a conservative.

I no longer identify myself as a Republican, but as a conservative. The Republican Party is no longer a bastion of conservatism, but I am hopeful that it will someday return to representing my conservative positions. The Republican Party has left a lot of people.

I am not in a compromising mindset this year.
Chris Hall

While I am not persuaded that Mike Huckabee is the right candidate, I do very much appreciate George Neumayr’s article, “Standing Athwart Huckabee, Yelling Stop.” I especially appreciate this observation, “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.”

How true! How the Republican Party needs to heed it!
Larry Wilson
Indianapolis, Indiana

I think that Mr. Neumayr misunderstands why many conservatives do not like Huckabee, so let me say it: It is because he is not a CONSERVATIVE! Huckabee has never met a tax hike he didn’t like, he is in lockstep with the left in demonizing “the rich,” and he is on board with the global warming alarmists. Just saying that you want to disband the IRS doesn’t make you a conservative, it makes you a populist.

As for his religion, most conservatives do not dislike him because he is a Christian, they dislike him because he acts as if THAT is what makes him qualified to be President. He is, as Rush Limbaugh has pointed out, playing the same old game of identity politics and using his religion as his identity. I am a Christian and a conservative, and I don’t like his using his religion as some-sort of qualification, it just doesn’t sit right with me.

Also, I don’t see a lot of conservatives cutting McCain or Romney a lot of slack as it concerns their conservative bona fides. McCain has been savaged because of his support of McCain-Feingold and “comprehensive immigration reform” (better known as amnesty), and Romney is getting it for his recent conversions on many conservative issues.

If Huckabee didn’t give people such strong flashbacks of that other “Man from Hope,” he would get so much more support from conservatives. His conservative positions seem hollow to me and others, and that is why conservatives don’t like Huck!
Eric Edwards
Walnut Cove, North Carolina

Thank you, George Neumayr! You have articulated a frustration that I and numerous other cultural conservatives have been having with the GOP establishment regarding Mike Huckabee.

Let me say up front that I do have some qualms about the former Arkansas governor. First, he has limited foreign policy experience, and we are in a post-9/11 world. Second, I am also concerned about his potential big-spending habits.

Having said that, Huckabee also has many strengths: he has more executive experience that any candidate of either party (don’t forget that 4 of the last 5 presidents were previously governors), he is strongly pro-life, he supports traditional marriage, he was elected statewide three times in Arkansas, a state which leans Democratic, and yes, he did cut taxes. Added to that, he has a very winsome personality that looks even better when compared to Hillary “I ain’t no ways tired” Clinton.

As Neumayr mentioned, the other Republican candidates also have their problems: Rudy Guiliani is still pro-abortion; Mitt Romney was until he decided to run for president, and he passed universal health care (read “socialized medicine”) in Massachusetts; Fred Thompson voted for McCain-Feingold; and John McCain, well, we all know about him.

So Mike Huckabee has shortcomings, too? It looks to me like he fits in pretty well with this crowd!

I do share fiscal conservative’s concerns about Huckabee. However, my fellow Republicans would do well to recall that Ronald Reagan embraced conservative Christians unapologetically:

* He wrote of abortion as being a major crisis for our nation.
* Under his leadership, a Human Life Amendment was endorsed in the Republican Party platform.
* He nominated Antonin Scalia and Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, both of whom are notorious for decrying the militant secularism of the ACLU, Planned Parenthood and their ilk.
* At a 1984 speech to the National Religious Broadcasters Convention, he said to thunderous applause, “This is a moment I’ve been looking forward to. I remember with such pleasure the time we spent together last year. Today I feel like I’m doing more than returning for a speech; I feel like I’m coming home.”

He loved them, and they loved him.

Reagan also knew, as many fiscal conservatives seem to be forgetting today, that pro-life Christians are an essential part of the Republican Party, comprising nearly 40% of the party base. In short, dissing them by nominating someone who is indifferent to their issues, or even hostile to them, is a recipe for disaster.
Greg Hoadley
Deerfield Beach, Florida

Methinks that Mr. Neumayr doth protest over much. First I need to say that I am not a fan of McCain, or Romney, or Huckabee. I voted for Senator Thompson in the primary today. How is it that the same folks that are so upset about Mr. Romney changing his mind on a string of issues, do not want us to be upset about Huckabee doing the same thing. As Governor, Mr. Huckabee was every bit as liberal on the immigration issue as Sen. McCain or George Bush. Now he is trying to get to the right of Ron Paul on the issue. As Governor, he had no particular qualms about raising taxes in Arkansas. Now he wants to be a hero by eliminating the IRS and making everyone pay between 20 and 25 cents per dollar as a federal sales tax. Those on a fixed income ought to love that. Fuel oil in New Hampshire costs well over $3.00 per gallon, so if Huckabee had his way I would pay between 60 and 75 cents per gallon more to keep from freezing. A fill up now costs me over $1100.00, and it takes me 3 fill ups per heating season. You do the math to see how much more I would pay, I never was a math genius.

Now some of Mr. Huckabee’s domestic pronouncements I don’t care for, but I can live with. Crime control is not one of those issues. His list of pardons, commutations, and early parole recommendations is abysmal, as is the record of recidivism of those receiving the Governor’s compassion. It would seem that any con that held a Bible while proclaiming his complete conversion was immediately put on a fast track out of prison. That is a huge issue with me.

Then there is the issue that trumps them all, foreign policy. It is one thing to have some different ideas from George Bush, but one ought to at least have some semi decent ideas that are based on an informed general knowledge of the subject. A decent idea does NOT include opining that President Bush and his administration have an arrogant bunker mentality. A decent idea does NOT include revealing that you have no idea what the National Intelligence Assessment is. You may think it is wrong, but someone running for POTUS ought to know what it is. A decent idea does NOT include revealing that you do not know the location of Afganistan and Pakistan relative to Iran. A decent idea does NOT include revealing that you do not know that the state of emergence in Pakistan had been lifted a couple of weeks ago, or saying that we, the U.S. should apologize for Ms. Bhutto’s assassination. He doesn’t have to be a foreign policy genius, but his level of ignorance of the world outside our borders, especially in that part of the world where they want to kill Americans, is scary.

His revealed ignorance on this subject shows someone that has not even tried to keep himself informed regarding world affairs. I am afraid to imagine what he will say when the subject turns to world economic issues and the interplay between various countries and the various world financial organizations. He has indicated that we ought to sit down and talk with countries that we have been talking to for years and are at logger heads with. In the world as it is today, we simply can not afford to wait for a President that is a complete novice in foreign relations to be tutored. Informed, intelligent decisions need to be made on a day to day basis, not after he goes through a series of cram courses. The security of our nation is far too important to be placed in the hands of someone that has spent the last however many years simply ignoring the rest of the world.

McCain, Romney, Thompson, Rudy G, and Hunter all have a huge head start on Huckabee in foreign policy. Ron Paul is an isolationist, so he is as bad or worse than Huckabee, in my humble opinion.
Ken Shreve
New Hampshire

In his article, George Neumayr writes that the “contempt for Huckabee is confusing.” I have contempt for anyone who blatantly uses his religiosity, and also demeans an opponent’s religion with subtle remarks to the press, to win an election. I wonder if Mr. Neumayr would be so “confused” if Huckabee’s remarks were made against a Catholic’s beliefs/rituals.
Lucille McClure
San Jose, California

Before George Neumayr sought to establish disbelief in science as a Conservative precept in your pages —

“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).”

— he asked readers of The American Thinker “What would Aquinas make of Darwin?”

Now he’s castigating the Reverend Huckabee’s heretical adherence to “global warming theory,” but his own declaration of textual allegiance to Aristotle’s Physics may be more to the point. Were it not for Aristotle, who would suspect that, having lost 100 pounds, Huckabee would arrive at the bottom one third later, were he and Niebuhr to go jump off a cliff.

Fear of a computer meltdown prevents me listing more examples on this mild January day. Those who accept the works of The Master Of Them That Know as a counterblast to Godless liberal materialist science will appreciate my predicament. They teach that the silicon dioxide insulating my laptop’s electronic guts is just another polymorph of ice, like quartz, diamonds and pearls.

Who are we to argue with the wisdom of the ancients?
Russell Seitz
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Re: Carl F. Horowitz’s Let’s Make a Deal:

I’m a middle-aged woman and I seem to be getting more liberal the older I get. In other words, I don’t generally agree with the Spectator. While I don’t disagree with the facts you’ve laid out in your “Let’s Make a Deal” article, I think you missed something.

I went to work for ULLICO in 1993 because I believed in the mission of affordable health care for America’s working people. ULLICO was never a large company, and the Global Crossing fiasco resulted not only in the results you described but also in outsourcing and layoffs at the company, itself.

I was laid off in 2004 after ULLICO outsourced its’ claims payment and administration. Granted, the outsourcing contract went to another union company. But my point is that you missed the stakeholdership (is that a word? 😉 of those of us who lost our jobs as a result of the shenanigans.

Granted, we didn’t lose as much as our investors. But most of us — if not all — believed in the mission and found ourselves disillusioned, having to hunt for jobs after long tenure with ULLICO. My 11 years was
pretty junior and the job hunting world had changed during my employment there.

I finally found a position with another company in whose mission I believe and I now fully support a single-payer health care system for the United States.

The bottom line is that betraying the trust investors, regulators — and employees — have in a corporate entity has repercussions for everyone.
Patricia M. Malarkey

It is easy to understand why this isn’t news. No, not because Democrats get most of their money from union thugs and it would reflect badly on the drive-by’s favorite candidates.

It isn’t news because this is exactly what unions do. They cheat their members to line the pockets of the $2000 suit union bosses…

Fortunately, for the bosses, union members are as stupid as many of their leaders are crooks!
Jay Molyneaux
Denver, North Carolina

Re: John Tabin’s It’s Crying Time, Again:

Great analysis, Mr. Tabin. May I add this.

The results in the New Hampshire Media Event are really no more valid than those of the Iowa Circuses, which have the relative value of a high school popularity contest.

A primary election is one in which the registered voters of a political party vote to select the candidate of their party whom they wish to run in a general election against the candidate chosen by the registered voters of the opposing party.

In more logical states, so-called “independent” voters are not allowed to vote in either primary election. It’s the price they pay for being Supercilious Wishy-Washies.

Those 40% of New Hampshire voters distorted the results in both parties’ primaries – that cannot be denied. We have no idea who the Democrats selected, and no idea who the Republicans selected. We do know who the S.W.W.s selected.

Candidly, I am completely mystified why those reputedly rock-solidly independent New Hampshireans in both parties aren’t furious that the S.W.W.s have interfered in their primaries.

I guess that’s the price THEY pay for their quadrennial week in the national spotlight.
A. C. Santore

John Tabin asks, “So how did Hillary pull it off, Ed Muskie tears and all?” What you saw, ladies and gentlemen, was another marvelously contrived display on the part of Shrillary Clinton. Nothing this woman does is without prior thought and examination of the consequences. I stand with Glenn Beck, Jim Quinn of “The Warroom,” Bill Kristol and probably others who have espoused the same thing. This act is worthy of consideration for the 2008 Academy Awards. This is not the kind of chief executive this country needs, not now, not ever.

By the way, I’m asking anyone out there that has video footage of Margaret Thatcher or Golda Meir crying to please submit it for examination. I suspect the only time Dame Thatcher cried was at Ronald Reagan’s funeral.
Jim Bjaloncik
Stow, Ohio

John Tabin replies: Actually, Thatcher did cry a couple of times in public — once when her son was missing, and once in the car when leaving Downing Street for the last time. She wasn’t reciting talking points about readiness and experience through the tears either time.

“How did Hillary Clinton defy Barack Obama’s double-digit lead in the New Hampshire polls and pull out a victory yesterday?”

Easy. Obama never had a double-digit lead. The polls were all off because the pollsters were disinformation. And this should be a lesson for the media as we go forward. Don’t trust the polls — or the drive-by media.
Peter Skurkiss
Stow, Ohio

According to GQ, your magazine “spearheaded the investigation into ‘Troopergate’ — eventually leading to the Paula Jones case, the Lewinsky scandal, and Bill Clinton’s impeachment hearings.” What I wonder now is whether Hillary Clinton’s PR coup d’etat in the New Hampshire primaries could benefit from your investigative prowess.

In the last 24 hours, press filings have publicized (1) her 11th hour sob session and (2) the incident of two men shouting “iron our shirt” during a campaign stop. Consider this: according to CNN, her approval rating was never so high as in 1998 during the Lewinsky “allegations,” when she enjoyed 59 percent favorable due to sympathy. Her sob session was her own doing. Would we put it past her campaign (since she is too shrewd to do so knowingly) to plant or even hire these two men to garner sexism sympathy?

Find these two. Investigate whether they did so on their own accord or whether they just igniting flames that will power the Hillary train.
Mike Stiles

I just read John Tabin’s article, and wish to offer another explanation. A New Hampshire resident just called in to Rush Limbaugh’s show and spoke of seeing numerous out of state vehicles showing up at the polling place of the small town where he lives and entering the polling station.

Who will investigate this possibility?
Martinn E. Winters

Re: Philip Klein’s The Richardson Juggernaut:

I am utterly befuddled as to why ink was wasted on the candidate from New Mexico. In the unforgiving world of baseball we had an aphorism describing Richardson’s playing skills. It applies here as well: the lad is a banjo hitter. Dear heaven can you imagine this goof at the helm? Please mommy, make the man stop.
James Eaton
Chetek, Wisconsin

Re: Philip Klein’s Trail of Tears:

While Democrat women were moved by Hillary’s tears it is clear the majority of voters didn’t buy it as they either voted for her Democrat rivals or for Republicans. The other good news from New Hampshire is that those who live by the polls die by the polls. That’s why all the hype that the Democrats are going to sweep into the White House on a cascade of tears demanding “change” (i.e., higher taxes, more pork spending, appeasement of Muslim terrorists, more aborted babies, death sentences for those in vegetative states or unworthy of life, freedom for serial killers, labor unions undermining economic freedom, tax breaks for super rich billionaires like George Soros, a castrated military and a US willing to submit its national security needs to the whims of foreign approval) is far from a done deal.

It’s interesting to note that in now Democrat New Hampshire voting was just as heavy in the Republican primary as the Democrat. Those conservative pundits mesmerized by the “intensity” of Democrat voters “hunger for victory” need to reexamine their speculative musings as they do inevitability of a Democrat coronation. As the Democrats increase the mud slinging and the racism that pervades that party begins to rear its ugly head, as its anti-Semitism did in 2004, Republicans (recognizing blue dog RINO Mike Huckabee has already tried using veiled religious bigotry to promote his campaign) need to steer clear of the fight and stay on the high road. Here’s hoping the Democrats behave as Democrats and tear each other apart.
Michael Tomlinson
Jacksonville, North Carolina

Re: Randal Allison’s letter (under “Hating on Cell Phones”) in Reader Mail’s Fan Mail:

I have to agree with Mr. Randall Allison about driving drunk and killing someone should be Murder One. I have a friend whose son was killed at 4PM by a drunk driver that was driving without a license and had 3 other drunk driving convictions. I have often said driving drunk is the same as using a gun, it is not the car or gun that kills, but the nut using them.
Elaine Kyle

Re: Mike Showalter’s letter (under “Jesus Doesn’t Love You”) in Reader Mail’s Fan Mail:

I would like to thank Mr. Showalter for accepting that I believe in Christ even though he feels that I don’t really get it or have been misled. That was exactly why I wrote in to avow my faith in Christ. You did not make me sad, and I am gratefull.

It is great to see Christian behavior from someone who espouses Christ. Too often we fall short, no matter what our denomination, myself included.

It is kind of fun having one of your own arguments inverted and used against you. Mormons love to ask the question “What happens to everybody who lived before Christ, or who never got the chance to hear about Christ?” You see we believe that God loves all of us and has made sure that everybody gets the opportunity to be set free by Christ. It is up to each of us to accept or reject Him.

But I am not writing in to convert people, or to argue my beliefs are right and yours are wrong. I just want people to know that we do believe in Christ. I accept that Baptists, Catholics, Lutherans, etc., etc., etc. have belief and faith in Christ. Thank you for demonstrating that belief.
James Bailey

Re: Deborah Durkee’s letter (under “Partying with Reagan”) in Reader Mail’s Fan Mail:

In her letter responding to Jeffrey Lord’s “Why I am a Reaganite,” Deborah Durkee wonders about what happened to Reagan Conservatism in Iowa and New Hampshire.

The answer is simple. In both the Iowa Circuses and the N.H. Media Event, Republicans had little say in who “won” on the Republican side because so-called “independents” were allowed to vote.

How many so-called “independents” might be classified as Reagan Conservatives? Precious few, I would imagine, else they’d be Republicans.

Hope, Ms. Durkee, will sustain you until February 6th, and allow you to prevail in November.

I hope.
A. C. Santore

Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The American Spectator, 122 S Royal Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314, You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!