Huckabee and Homeschooling
Yes, I realize that the following video is propaganda, but 'tis the season. The occasion is that my wife told me that there is a homeschooling mom who has been blogging about how Huckabee is unfriendly to the homeschooling cause. He's even got an endorsement from a national homeshooling group and I guess she is furrowing her eyebrows about it, like it's some kind of obvious conspiracy. My guess is that it's another desire for "egg in your beer" on the part of the puristas.
But, speaking of conspiracies, it might also be partially due to an article on World Net Nut Daily which is written in their standard fear mongering fashion. Huckabee received the NEA's endorsement in New Hampshire for the Republican nomination. So what? They endorsed Hillary for the Dems and everyone on the east coast thinks that he's the easiest to beat in the general. Could the NEA be playing politics here? I'd take those odds to Vegas.
And speaking of eggs and beer, I can't think of a better way to ruin a beer than to crack an egg in it. I like mine crisp and clean with no protein. Maybe the saying should be changed to "What do you want, Dewars in your Dos Equis? Stoli in your St. Pauli? Grand Marnier in your Grand Ridge?"
Please feel free to suggest other creative boilermaker combinations in the comments, along with substantial comments about whatever I started talking about here. Oh, yes, Mike Huckabee. Full disclosure: I could be happy vote for that guy, tho' I think he has some nutty, unrealistic ideas about deporting illegals. That's red meat for the wild-eyed fringe, IMO, and he'll convenient toss it in the event that he goes all the way.
So far he defends the sanctity of life, he thinks guns are vote multipliers for the common man rather than animal killers, and he makes it easy to homeschool. Sounds pretty conservative to me.
ReplyDeleteI saw the debates last evening. I did not like Romney at all. He really does remind me of a CEO. Having worked for large corporations that equates to a fascist. Then he was the governor of Massholevania, which really convinces me that he is soulless. Paul was a disappointment. Too whack-job. Forget Thompson. As usual McCain seems a bit too smart ass for me. Rudy is another big time fascist. It looks like Huckabee.
If he is not on the ballot I'll write in Ron Paul. Pauli, help clear my thinking. I am too cynical at this point.
I voted for Ron Paul in 1988.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand the antipathy toward Romney on the part of so many conservatives, and IMHO the fact they kept badgering him last night in the debate made him look important rather than weak. The guy reeks of competence -- is that what turns people off? because in a way i can understand that.
ReplyDeletethen again, i was quite impressed with hillary a few times last night so you could argue i'm suffering some severe cognitive dissonance. most definitely a first for me.
Forget Thompson.
ReplyDeleteWhy?
And I'm with Kathleen. It's as though conservatives want some sort of ideological purity test. Considering that Giuliani, Huckabee, and (less so) McCain are all problematic to one degree or the other, I think the antipathy to Romney is excessive. I can understand where it's coming from, but Romney is fine by me.
But Fred is better, and the casual dismissal of him by so much of the electorate is baffling.
Romney has competence, sure, but he comes off as really risk-averse in debate formats. I do think that he could "clean up" Washington. Like Huckabee said, "I remind you of the guy you work with, not the guy who laid you off." Well, maybe there are some people who need to be laid off.
ReplyDeleteI think there's a sort of dichotomy out there between competence and ideological purity. Then there is the worry about electability. I just wish I knew who would be in everyone's cabinet right now, it would make it easier for me to make up my mind.
I think Romney made a big mistake in going negative on Huckabee. It made him look small and like he was doubling down to try to beat the Iowa house. But Iowa hasn't been picking winners lately for Repubs.
ReplyDeleteRomney was the republican governor of a very liberal state. If he got elected did he do it as a conservative? We would conclude from that fact, that he had to move left to accomplish that. So by virtue of being the governor of Mass he is out. "I like mandates" is not a very competent thing to say.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with executives of large enterprises is that they do appear competent, however my experience with their ability to change the systems they govern is limited. They almost always fail to see that change can only occur at the grass roots. If it comes from above it tends to be more dictatorial.
What I found most strange is that with the exception of Richardson, all the dems were quite good. Obama was talking about the people having to get involved in their government. I don't recall any of the republicans talking that way. Hillary, Edwards, and Obama beat any of the republicans.
Even though Ron Paul went on a crazy rant, Thompson should not have laughed at him. Laughing at someone who is essentially correct is foolish. So Thompson is foolish and arrogant.
I am not buying into the whole Paul message but he is saying things that are very true.
Right now I am looking at the candidates on an emotional level. So I am still undecided. Feel free to tell me who to vote for and why?
Pauli, Sounds like a good weekly blog post until the election. "Who to vote for and why part 10. . ."
Nuts. Seven comments on this post, and not one creative boilermaker suggestion.
ReplyDeleteHere's one: ginger brandy & Bass.
Even though Ron Paul went on a crazy rant, Thompson should not have laughed at him. Laughing at someone who is essentially correct is foolish. So Thompson is foolish and arrogant.
ReplyDeleteNah. That just makes me love Fred! even more. Paul's a nut, might as well treat him like one.
Like Huckabee said, "I remind you of the guy you work with, not the guy who laid you off."
Yeah, this is the kind of crap that actually makes me like Huckabee even less. This puts me in the minority, probably, but the populist rhetoric spewed by Huckabee and Obama just annoys me. The "unity" candidates play on people's cynicsm, but in reality all it is is empty rhetoric. Our Nation was built on the notion that their would be partisan discord. The notion that presidential candidates can simply end centuries of pluralistic bickering is nonsense, and speaks to the emptiness of their respective platforms.
i agree paul zummo, i find huckabee a total turnoff. he's unctious. it must be the blue state in us.
ReplyDeletecube, so no conservatives need apply if they held office in blue states? wow.
ReplyDeleteHere's one: ginger brandy & Bass.
ReplyDeleteWhy not trout or salmon? Yukkety yuk, hardy har.
I once made the statement that I'd vote for Donald Duck to get a justice appointed who would overturn Roe. I'm that much of a single-issue voter. With Huckles the clown making such a strong showing, it looks like my hypothesis just might get challenged.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with Mitt is that he has not been a conservative long enough for me to have any confidence in him. He's a smart and credible guy otherwise and referring back to my "Donald Duck" principle, he would certainly get my vote in the general.
The Huckster did accomplish one thing. He let the party establishment know that without social conservatives, there is no party and so Rudy is headed for some well-deserved bench rest.
Now the social conservatives have to be reminded that without economic conservatives there is no republican party that can win elections and we can put the Reagan coalition back together under John McCain and win this thing.
Kucinich is Donald Duck.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'm a McCain guy, too. But I'm not as negative on Huckabee or Romney as some are. I'm having more fun watching this that I thought I would.
McCain, as in McCain/Feingold?
ReplyDeletewe're not electing a king, we are electing a president. So you'll sacrifice the principle of freedom of speech for an ideological pro-life purity of the sort that is, in any event, irrelevant to the presidential office?
I truly don't get it.
so no conservatives need apply if they held office in blue states?
ReplyDeleteKathleen
I didn't say that. I do assert that if you hold a state office like governor in a blue state then you are not a conservative. So your question is not accurate. Sure there are probably conservative pockets in Mass. You might get a seat on a city council, perhaps even a conservative state representative, but a governor? No chance. The fact that he was governor of mass eliminates him.
As far as sacrificing free speech for ideological purity. I would assert that someone who is willing to fudge on the sanctity of life is also capable of infringing on your first and second amendment rights. So pro-death politicians, in my mind, don't see rights emanating from God, but from the state. If you don't have the right to life then why would you have the right to liberty or the pursuit of property except that it be granted to you by the state. If that were the case then these rights are mutable.
"I would assert that someone who is willing to fudge on the sanctity of life is also capable of infringing on your first and second amendment rights."
ReplyDeletewell, anyone is "capable of" it, but it doesn't follow that he is going to do it. free speech rights are constitutional: abortion rights aren't (notwithstanding Roe v Wade, which is a bad decision). only truly constitutional rights are the business of the president and/or the federal government generally.
i'll say it again: the president of the united states does not have the power to decide whether or not abortion is legal. never has, never will. the most pro-lifers can hope for (unless they want to get rid of the Constitution) is that, due to executive appointments on the supreme court, the question will devolve back to the states. You seem to be looking for a pro-life crusader in the white housen who will impose a federal ban on abortion, and this is NOT a conservative position. a true conservative pro-life position is "it's not up to washington, let the states decide". the real definition of conservative is getting lost here.
is that, due to executive appointments on the supreme court, the question will devolve back to the states.
ReplyDeleteOne would hope that a conservative president would appoint judges to the supreme court that would overturn RvW. That is fine with me.
I would not trust Romney to do this. Professional administrators like Romney will take the path of least resistance. If Romney wins I would predict that his appointments to the Supreme Court will be far less controversial than Bush's. It will be pretty smooth sailing for Romney judges.
What's wrong with a pro-life crusader, provided that he or she abides by the constitution? There is nothing wrong with strong leadership. I am happy to let the decision pass to the states. Along with all kinds of other things passing to the states. I'd really like my SS# money too. They can pass that back to me. I'd like to have about 80% of my fedTax back.
Truly, I have no idea what Romney's positions are on a lot of things. I admit freely that I am writing him off simply because he was the governor of Mass. All that tells me is that he is at best a fiscal conservative. Big deal. That doesn't even guarantee that he will cut my taxes. All that means is he will try to balance the budget, and play nice with big corporations. With fiscal conservatives everything is on the table.
Truly, I have no idea what Romney's positions are on a lot of things. I admit freely that I am writing him off simply because he was the governor of Mass.
ReplyDeleteCubeland, with all due respect, that's really shallow reasoning. Republicans in the state of Massachusetts won the gubernatorial races because the Dems tore each other apart in the primary, leaving the GOP candidate with an easier path to victory. Romney didn't govern as a liberal, and his so-called flip flops essentially boil down to him changing his mind on abortion.
Again, I understand where the mistrust is coming from, but it's horribly misguided. In fact, I have more faith in Romney to appoint originalists to the bench than the current President, who took a little coaxing to come up with Alito.
It's one thing to write off an avowed pro-choicer like Rudy, quite another to write off someone who is pro-life because their conversion came too late in life.
Paul Z.
ReplyDeleteYou right. That is a shallow reason. I am working right now too, so in a lull I checked him out His site, not really anything there that caught my eye that said conservative. The youtubes on his flopping. Let's I knew that he was a Mass gov, and that he was accused by his opponents of being a flip flopper. I discarded McCain's opinion of him. So I've seen him flip on gays and abortion on youtube, and just recently. In the youtubes he behaved just like I assumed he behaved. I now mistrust him completely. He's just like every other CEO I've ever heard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToQbeBC_fOI&feature=related
http://www.mittromney.com/Issues/index
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzZC92IXHyw
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/19/AR2007021900916.html
I didn't like his whining in the debates either about the personal attacks. McCain was right to throw him under the bus.
OK, I just can't get past the fact that Huckabee supports a nationwide smoking ban. That may seem like an odd sticking point, but it seems to point to someone who may have conservative values, but does he really have a conservative philosophy of government?
ReplyDeleteI don't think so...at least I haven't seen it yet.
The smoking ban is scary, so is the posturing on "git rid of them thar Mexicano illigals." Other than that, he's great, sure why not, etc.
ReplyDeleteReagan signed pro-choice laws in California, later he said it was a mistake, i.e., he "grew in office" on the pro-life issue as the President. He was a Republican governor of California, a blue state. Conservatives tend to put the rose-colored spectacles on about him and forget he wasn't perfect either.
None of these guys is perfect, none is 100% consistent. Even Ron Paul fell prey to the pork barrel last year. McCain-Feingold was stupid -- by the way, big Mr. Conservative, Fred Thompson, was in favor of that.... like I said, choose your poison.
I am working right now too, so in a lull I checked him out His site, not really anything there that caught my eye that said conservative.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I guess other than his stand on abortion, taxes, natonal defense, illegal immigration, funding for stem cell research, gay marriage, and Supreme Court Justices, his conservative bona fides are a little lacking.
Paul Z
ReplyDeleteHe's making it up. He either lied to the voters of Mass to become governor or he is lying now.
It doesn't matter. I am too old and set in my ways to believe that this man is a genuine conservative. He'd be better off running for what he is. I won't vote for Rudy, but Rudy is not trying to hide what he is. So I don't dislike the man, but Mitt is trying to fool me so I view him as a creep politician that he is.
He's making it up. He either lied to the voters of Mass to become governor or he is lying now.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad that you have such a talented gift for insight, and can know for certain that the man is making it up. That he has held most of these positions, contrary to your misinformation, since before he ran for governor, I guess is to be discounted.
Go ahead and doubt him if you want. I wouldn't urge someone to vote for an individual that they didn't feel comfortable with. Romney isn't my first choice, and I think there are enough people like you out there that he would have a difficult time winning in November. I would add that if you can't trust Romney, then you should give a second look to Thompson, who has held these same positions as Romney, only with the benefit of having done so for a much longer period of time.
One last thing on all this. While I can understand not fully trusting politicians, I would also add that the pro-life movement is not exactly in the position to be disregarding people who have changed their minds towards our way of thinking.
OK, I just can't get past the fact that Huckabee supports a nationwide smoking ban. That may seem like an odd sticking point, but it seems to point to someone who may have conservative values, but does he really have a conservative philosophy of government?
ReplyDeleteIt's not odd at all. I addressed this on my own blog (sorry for the pimp there) a while back. Philosophically, Huckabee is no conservative.
Pauli:
ReplyDeleteNow that you mention it, salmon with ginger brandy sauce sounds far more appealing than any of the presidential candidates.
Locally grown salmon, of course.
btw, cube, when you reacted to Romney's use of the word mandates, you understood that to mean that he was not conservative. there's nothing inherently "liberal" about a "mandate" generically. actually it's possible to have conservative mandates, and in that case Romney's mandate was that everyone in Massachusetts be insured privately. In other words, it was a mandate against socialized medicine, which is inevitable when one has uninsured citizens because they end up getting treatment when they need it, regardless of their lack of insurance.
ReplyDeletei see class bias among self-professed conservatives against someone successful like romney and it really disturbs me. (It's also appalling that huckabee plays on that impulse) maybe, just maybe, the guy deserves to be rich? it's not like he's frittering his money away on cocktails in St. Barts, for pete's sake. running for president is expensive and can't be a walk in the park.
Kathleen
ReplyDeleteI fully admit that I am evaluating all these people on an emotional level. Also, I’ve been fortunate enough to work with and know a couple execs for large corporations. There is a mindset there which I am familiar with. It has biased me. Seeing the you tube of Romney only confirms my prejudice. For example, if he could get a big tax cut by allowing more draconian gun laws I believe he would do it.
Also you were talking about the limited role of the president earlier. I am not looking for a strong president or a smart president. What I would like to see is someone who will lead. CEO’s are not leaders, they administrators. A weak president who has some good people skill will suit me fine. We are supposed to be a self-governing people, I’d like a motivator-in-chief.
On that note, the attitude that we need this enormous government and smart experienced people to help us run our lives demonstrates a lack of imagination. I can imagine a world with a little tiny government, and people raised to take of their own self-governing. I am not even sure anymore that I actually own my property. I think I lease it from the government. If get behind on my taxes the government will take it from me. I am not really feeling free right now. I feeling like I work for the government. They have a piece of everything I own. At some point I will buckle down and do my research and try to make a more informed choice. But I can assure you it will not be Romney.
One last thing, Romney’s wealth does not disturb me at all. I agree with you that people give in to their jealousy, and try to exploit the wealth differences. I am glad that he is wealthy for him and his family. Being wealthy is actually a lot of work. You were kind of alluding to that. Even if he were in St. Bart’s sipping on a non-alcoholic non-caffeinated beverage, he still has a tremendous amount of pressure. He has to manage that wealth 7 days a week regardless of who he hires or where he is vacationing.
Cube, i'm sure some, even many, CEOs/high level execs are twerps but some of them are brilliant and have created something from nothing. some companies are brilliantly run, and some die an ignominious death. do you think steve jobs is "not a leader"? he has his flaws but you couldn't call him a follower.
ReplyDeletethen again, if you ask me, the world could use a few more "paper pushers" with ethics and who are public-service minded. those are the sorts of people who used to tell people "no, i'm not going to give you that $800K mortgage, you can't afford that house, let alone the pool/car/big screen tv/new kitchen." those paper pusher stuffed shirts went the way of the dodo bird and look where it got us - foreclosures galore, an impending recession, and a gutted middle class. i say, bring back the stuffed shirts.
PS buy gold.