Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: I <3 Huckabee

  1. #1
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default I <3 Huckabee

    January 08, 2008
    Huckabee's Counterproductive Sweet Talk
    By Dick Armey

    With a definitive win in last week's Iowa caucus, Mike Huckabee talked himself into the frontrunner position for the Republican presidential nomination. His folksy demeanor and populist promises are central to his appeal, but they mask a strategy designed to divide the conservative movement. If the Republican party chooses to follow Huckabee's lead, it will allow political sweet talk to destroy its greatest electoral and policy-making advantage: the GOP's traditional political consensus built around limiting the size and scope of government.

    Mike Huckabee abandoned conservative governance long ago. As governor of Arkansas from 1996-2007, his record on economic issues was long and dismal. He raised the sales tax and passed a tax on gasoline, increasing the state's overall average tax burden by almost 50 percent. Spending shot up more than 65 percent under his leadership. In the current campaign, he supports expensive, restrictive energy legislation, a misguided new national sales tax, and nanny-state notions like a federal smoking ban.

    By now, these facts are well known. Fiscal conservatives have spilled gallons of ink decrying his record, and for good reason. Yet the social conservatives who support him should be concerned as well, for Huckabee undermines the GOP's longstanding unity between its traditional and economic wings, a coalition built to serve the goals of social as well fiscal conservatives.

    This coalition, solidified in the Reagan years, rests on the principle that freedom--individual and economic--is not in conflict with virtue, but rather is the key to it. Social conservatives are served by promoting economic freedom, and vice-versa. Moreover, the alignment of these interests is the foundation for the GOP's electoral successes, no small thing in the realm of politics. The enthusiasm for Huckabee from the party's socially conservative wing is not just misplaced; it's counterproductive.

    Indeed, Huckabee explicitly seems to want to destroy the longstanding partnership that has defined the Right. Ed Rollins, Huckabee's campaign manager, recently dismissed the Reagan coalition as "gone," saying "it doesn't mean a whole lot to people anymore." That's quite the claim, but perhaps it shouldn't be a surprise. Huckabee has every incentive to distance himself from the GOP coalition; his nomination rests on its demise.

    With his jokes and folksy patter, he presents himself as affable and friendly, but only by sowing discontent and disunity can he hope to split off enough of the party's base to win the nomination. Yes, despite the sunny rhetoric, Huckabee's act is little more than another strategic political ploy.

    Thus, he has worked to make his small-minded populism a credit by pitting his socially conservative supporters against the GOP's business wing. One of his favorite lines is that he represents the interests of "Main Street, not Wall Street." But this assumes that the interests of the two are not in alignment, that somehow, one group can only gain at the expense of the other - never mind that the jobs and livelihoods of America's workers and small towns are tied inexorably with the larger economy. It's a dark form of class warfare shrewdly masked by his sunny chatter.

    Of course, his genial demeanor and willingness to overlook both principle and fact is indicative of a distinct and disturbing trend in American politics. Huckabee seemed to come from nowhere in the race, but he is not just a lonely, surprise candidate, but a symbol of the new wave of feel-good conservatism, which seeks not to deal in policy that works so much as policy and rhetoric that provide emotional gratification.

    Huckabee comes off as the self-esteem candidate, in which merely feeling good is the core of the message. He's not the only Republican making a practice of peddling cotton-candy bromides. As FreedomWorks president Matt Kibbe recently pointed out, former Bush speechwriter and Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson has been pushing a similarly foolish agenda: inspiring, heartfelt--and utterly ineffective.

    More than ever, we need to remember that freedom, prosperity, and opportunity are at the center of the limited government vision for America. Ours is an inherently compassionate and positive agenda, and it would be better if more candidates adopted Huckabee's accessible, upbeat tone. But sunshine rhetoric in the service of liberal fantasies is a political and policy dead end. Allowing Mike Huckabee to become the face of conservatism would trade unity and principle for an ill-advised romance with a flighty, flaky new brand of politics.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  2. #2
    Filthy Rich Member Odin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Just West of Boston
    Posts
    1,973

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Dick Armey is great he has made some gems over the years but isnt he slightly right wing for you Tuff?

    This is the same Dick Armey who in essence wants the palestinains to go away. Huh?

    He's also got loads of fun stuff about gays and europeans. Really Tuff, I know you love Mitt but if you venture to much farther to the right to support your anti everyone else view you might become a sith lord.
    There are few things more annoying than some idiot who has never done anything trying to say definitively how something should be done.

    Sua Sponte

  3. #3
    Enlightened Despot Member Vladimir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    In ur nun, causing a bloody schism!
    Posts
    7,906

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by Odin
    Dick Armey is great he has made some gems over the years but isnt he slightly right wing for you Tuff?

    This is the same Dick Armey who in essence wants the palestinains to go away. Huh?
    Wow. Isn't that blog a little left-wing for you? Ethnic cleansing? Just a little bit of bias there.

    And yes, it would be nice for us if they just "went away." It would be nice if all of our problems went away but not very realistic.


    Reinvent the British and you get a global finance center, edible food and better service. Reinvent the French and you may just get more Germans.
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
    How do you motivate your employees? Waterboarding, of course.
    Ik hou van ferme grieten en dikke pinten
    Down with dried flowers!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



  4. #4
    Filthy Rich Member Odin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Just West of Boston
    Posts
    1,973

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir
    Wow. Isn't that blog a little left-wing for you? Ethnic cleansing? Just a little bit of bias there.

    And yes, it would be nice for us if they just "went away." It would be nice if all of our problems went away but not very realistic.
    Left wing for me? Nah, i like to see the foolishness on both sides, did you read the blog? It included direct quotes from the guy, hes in a fantasy world (or was).
    There are few things more annoying than some idiot who has never done anything trying to say definitively how something should be done.

    Sua Sponte

  5. #5
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Remember the concept of "Debate"? Ad Hominem attacks on someones character are emotionally powerful but poorly rooted. Previous mistakes (major or minor) don't negate all accurate or correct positions in your life.

    The guy said a few things that were out of taste, but that doesn't stop him from calling a spade a spade. Read the article. I think that you of all people will agree with at least the ramifications of a Huckabee nomination, no?

    Remember, just because jack cried wolf too often to be trusted doesn't mean that there isn't really a wolf nearby.

    BTW - This isn't about Mitt, this is about Huckabee and the immediate future of the Republican party.

    If it was about Mitt I would have posted an article about McCain or his record or something.
    Last edited by ICantSpellDawg; 01-08-2008 at 19:01.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  6. #6
    Filthy Rich Member Odin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Just West of Boston
    Posts
    1,973

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    The guy said a few things that were out of taste, but that doesn't stop him from calling a spade a spade. Read the article. I think that you of all people will agree with at least the ramifications of a Huckabee nomination, no?
    there isnt a republican in the field I think can win anyway (maybe McCain), huckabee dosent frighten me at all. The ramifications are pretty clear to me, if he won, hes a social conservative who I think (I would have to go back and check) thinks the theory of creation trumps evolution.

    Sounds like a lot like Bush in may aspects, thus I dont fear him as a candidate.

    Remember, just because jack cried wolf too often to be trusted doesn't mean that there isn't really a wolf nearby.
    that maybe true, but Jack does get eaten eventually in the kids story dosent he? Armey pretty far to the right tuff, but if you want to add him to the list of pied pipers against Huckabee why not just register democrat now?

    BTW - This isn't about Mitt, this is about Huckabee and the immediate future of the Republican party.

    If it was about Mitt I would have posted an article about McCain or his record or something.
    Your position on Romney has been well noted Tuff, and while you didnt mention him by name wouldnt it be remiss of posters to venture that your position (particularly pertaining to other republican candidates) would naturally have some basis in your belief that Romney is the guy?
    There are few things more annoying than some idiot who has never done anything trying to say definitively how something should be done.

    Sua Sponte

  7. #7
    Nobody expects the Senior Member Lemur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wisconsin Death Trip
    Posts
    15,754

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    If it makes you feel any better, Tuff, here's a good analysis of the Iowa voting, with the conclusion that Catholics no like Huckabee. That would be a serious problem nationally. Catholics vote, and there's a lot of 'em.

    Huckabee's wins are blue, Romney's in red:


    Compare that with the Catholic population, darker = more Catholics:

    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them ... well, I have others." — Groucho Marx

  8. #8
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Catholics tend to like Romney at least where I am. I think it's the Kennedy-like speech.

    Odin, pretend that the article wasn't written by Dick Armey. What do you think about it then? I'm not just talking about the idea of Huckabee becoming president - just being nominated will seriously hurt the Reagan coalition.
    Last edited by ICantSpellDawg; 01-08-2008 at 20:01.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  9. #9
    L'Etranger Senior Member Banquo's Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hunting the Snark, a long way from Tipperary...
    Posts
    5,604

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    The article notes but does not explore the real problem facing the American right which that the Reagan coalition was an unholy one, destined always to fall asunder.

    Fiscal "conservatives" are keen on limited/small government - since money is power, high taxation provides government with the conviction that it knows best how to use that power, and disenfranchises the individual. A belief that governments should spend as little as possible to maintain society, and leave the rest up to the market and the individual is a highly libertarian stance.

    Social conservatives however, think the government should be regulating people's morality and personal choices. They believe that their (invariably religious) moral framework should be applied to everyone, by statute if necessary. They love the government and its interference. The legislation they try to propose would make the old Politburo blush.

    Social conservatives are, by inclination, adherents of the state knowing best. Properly, they belong in the far left. The right should believe in personal liberty first and always, not just when it comes to the chequebook.

    (It should be noted that a similar fault-line exists across the floor, where some left wingers believe in both personal civil rights and the government's right to tax one bloodless for the benefit of the feckless).
    "If there is a sin against life, it consists not so much in despairing as in hoping for another life and in eluding the implacable grandeur of this one."
    Albert Camus "Noces"

  10. #10
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
    The article notes but does not explore the real problem facing the American right which that the Reagan coalition was an unholy one, destined always to fall asunder.

    Fiscal "conservatives" are keen on limited/small government - since money is power, high taxation provides government with the conviction that it knows best how to use that power, and disenfranchises the individual. A belief that governments should spend as little as possible to maintain society, and leave the rest up to the market and the individual is a highly libertarian stance.

    Social conservatives however, think the government should be regulating people's morality and personal choices. They believe that their (invariably religious) moral framework should be applied to everyone, by statute if necessary. They love the government and its interference. The legislation they try to propose would make the old Politburo blush.

    Social conservatives are, by inclination, adherents of the state knowing best. Properly, they belong in the far left. The right should believe in personal liberty first and always, not just when it comes to the chequebook.

    (It should be noted that a similar fault-line exists across the floor, where some left wingers believe in both personal civil rights and the government's right to tax one bloodless for the benefit of the feckless).
    Well that is just untrue. Sure a strong economy is the middle of the road. Most people want that without partisan bias.

    Social conservatives tend to be religious - but not one religion. The want the government to primarily stay out of their lives (school indoctrination, pressure on churches, political correctness on holidays, etc)

    Libertarianism is a sensible coalition - look at Ron Paul for example. He is adamantly pro-life.

    I'm not saying that it is the only possible coalition, but the modern democratic party seems to be so firmly into big government and taxes that it would be very hard for an economic libertarian to side with them. It used to be that the democrats would avoid tax talk and then find a way to raise them anyway. Now they seem to outright cheer for increases in taxes.

    I also see that people who want a more humane earth could side with pro-lifers and religious movements. That seems to be the way it had gone throughout the 19th century - with feminists, abolitionists and humanitarians championing the pro-life movement. The conservatives at that time were largely concerned with massive and all powerful government and oppressed the majority. That ship seems to have passed in the middle part of last century.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  11. #11
    Needs more flowers Moderator drone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moral High Grounds
    Posts
    9,222

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    Social conservatives tend to be religious - but not one religion. The want the government to primarily stay out of their lives (school indoctrination, pressure on churches, political correctness on holidays, etc)
    I tend to think the opposite is true. Social conservatives tend to be religious, and want the government to legislate their views on the rest of the populace. Using abortion as an example, social conservatives want it banned for everyone. If they don't like intrusive government, why can't they just not get abortions and leave everyone else to make their own moral decisions? Are they worried about their faith and commitment, and want things made illegal so they aren't tempted? Or do they just want to stick their noses into everyone else's business? My guess is that it is the last.
    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    Libertarianism is a sensible coalition - look at Ron Paul for example. He is adamantly pro-life.
    The difference here is that Ron Paul will not try to ban abortions nationwide. He is pro-life, but believes the decisions are better made at the local levels. Don't confuse his personal beliefs with how he thinks the government should be run. Libertarianism is at direct odds with social conservatism. It's basically "you go to (or avoid) hell your way, I'll go (or avoid) mine".

    Basically, both of the two parties want your money (and thus more power as BG states). Social conservatives hijacked the GOP to legislate morality, while the tax-and-spend Dems try to redistribute wealth (I guess, I'm not really sure about what they are trying to do with it ).
    The .Org's MTW Reference Guide Wiki - now taking comments, corrections, suggestions, and submissions

    If I werent playing games Id be killing small animals at a higher rate than I am now - SFTS
    Si je n'étais pas jouer à des jeux que je serais mort de petits animaux à un taux plus élevé que je suis maintenant - Louis VI The Fat

    "Why do you hate the extremely limited Spartan version of freedom?" - Lemur

  12. #12
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by drone
    I tend to think the opposite is true. Social conservatives tend to be religious, and want the government to legislate their views on the rest of the populace. Using abortion as an example, social conservatives want it banned for everyone. If they don't like intrusive government, why can't they just not get abortions and leave everyone else to make their own moral decisions? Are they worried about their faith and commitment, and want things made illegal so they aren't tempted? Or do they just want to stick their noses into everyone else's business? My guess is that it is the last.
    First: I want to point out that your broad generalizations are just that.

    Second: I don't know of a state in the U.S. where murder is legal (aside from Abortion or Capital punishment). Why couldn't the Federal government allow states to decide on the issue of slavery? Because lives were being destroyed, stripped of value as human beings.

    But I concede that it could have been left to the states in that instance. I would be content if that were the case with abortion. Alas, it is not because there is a weak supreme court ruling backing a ban on democratic federal or state legislation.

    Quote Originally Posted by drone
    The difference here is that Ron Paul will not try to ban abortions nationwide. He is pro-life, but believes the decisions are better made at the local levels. Don't confuse his personal beliefs with how he thinks the government should be run. Libertarianism is at direct odds with social conservatism. It's basically "you go to (or avoid) hell your way, I'll go (or avoid) mine".
    It isn't at odds. Some aspects are, but it depends on your definition of "conservative". Which values are you seeking to conserve and why? In Ron Paul's case he is primarily trying to conserve the ideas put forward in the constitution. That is why he is a foe of abortion and a massive Federal government (notice that I said federal). In my case it is the same thing - but I am also concerned with the state level. My opinions on federal government are very different from my opinions on State government. Many pro-lifers are saying "stop the government from allowing people to kill other people without legal consequence" because it strips human beings of their rights as established in the constitution. (please don't say that they are not citizens - they are clearly the offspring of citizens which is a qualifier)

    Quote Originally Posted by drone
    Basically, both of the two parties want your money (and thus more power as BG states). Social conservatives hijacked the GOP to legislate morality, while the tax-and-spend Dems try to redistribute wealth (I guess, I'm not really sure about what they are trying to do with it ).
    Your first statement is rhetorical and doesn't clearly define how Republicans want your money (I'm not saying that they don't here, just that you failed to make the point)

    If social conservatives have "Hijacked" the G.O.P. then the social left has "Hijacked" the Democratic party. This is the reality in a 2 party system where 2 schools of thought are strongly at odds - they gravitate to one party or the other (with exception).
    Last edited by ICantSpellDawg; 01-08-2008 at 21:29.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  13. #13
    Needs more flowers Moderator drone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moral High Grounds
    Posts
    9,222

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    First: I want to point out that your broad generalizations are just that.

    Second: I don't know of a state in the U.S. where murder is legal (aside from Abortion or Capital punishment). Why couldn't the Federal government allow states to decide on the issue of slavery? Because lives were being destroyed, stripped of value as human beings.

    But I concede that it could have been left to the states in that instance. I would be content if that were the case with abortion. Alas, it is not because there is a weak supreme court ruling backing a ban on democratic federal or state legislation.
    Your belief is that abortion is murder. There are people who do not share that view. Neither side can prove their viewpoint as correct. By attempting to ban abortion, social conservatives are pushing their morals on the rest of the populace.

    Let's not turn this into an abortion thread, so other shining examples of social conservatism: the temperance movement, drug laws, sodomy laws, censorship, and basically anything that usually is accompanied with "think of the children" cries.

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    It isn't at odds. Some aspects are, but it depends on your definition of "conservative". Which values are you seeking to conserve and why? In Ron Paul's case he is primarily trying to conserve the ideas put forward in the constitution. That is why he is a foe of abortion and a massive Federal government (notice that I said federal). In my case it is the same thing - but I am also concerned with the state level. My opinions on federal government are very different from my opinions on State government. Many pro-lifers are saying "stop the government from allowing people to kill other people without legal consequence" because it strips human beings of their rights as established in the constitution. (please don't say that they are not citizens - they are clearly the offspring of citizens which is a qualifier)
    Again, you are making the assumption that an embryo/fetus is a person, both legally (and spiritually if you will). Not everyone agrees. Dr. Ron Paul is an OB/GYN, his experiences have lead him to be pro-life. You seem to be attributing his love of the Constitution to his pro-life stance, which I don't believe is the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    Your first statement is rhetorical and doesn't clearly define how Republicans want your money (I'm not saying that they don't here, just that you failed to make the point)

    If social conservatives have "Hijacked" the G.O.P. then the social left has "Hijacked" the Democratic party. This is the reality in a 2 party system where 2 schools of thought are strongly at odds - they gravitate to one party or the other (with exception).
    GOP money-grabs: Legislating morality takes money for enforcement, this is where the social conservatives get their hands in your wallet. Country Club Republicans get your money through legislation favoring corporations. Neo-cons get it by starting illegal wars and raiding the treasury. Fiscal conservatives don't want your money, but nobody listens to them these days.

    And I wouldn't say the social left has hijacked the Democratic party. The Democratic party is a coalition of many vastly different viewpoints, which generally explains why they can't get anything accomplished.
    The .Org's MTW Reference Guide Wiki - now taking comments, corrections, suggestions, and submissions

    If I werent playing games Id be killing small animals at a higher rate than I am now - SFTS
    Si je n'étais pas jouer à des jeux que je serais mort de petits animaux à un taux plus élevé que je suis maintenant - Louis VI The Fat

    "Why do you hate the extremely limited Spartan version of freedom?" - Lemur

  14. #14
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by drone
    The Democratic party is a coalition of many vastly different viewpoints, which generally explains why they can't get anything accomplished.
    I find it hard to believe that you can write that in good faith and not believe it about the Republican party.

    The democrats have seemed to find a candidate in record time. A simple realization of this tells me that there is more homogeneity in the party leadership than of the dems in the G.O.P.

    But still it isn't true. Both parties have very different viewpoints within them. To not realize that is odd.




    Aside - Do you believe in forcing the taxpayer to fund abortions for the poor through a socialized medical plan?

    You speak of us placing "Bans", yet you don't realize that the "Ban" on democratic dialog under Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton is truely oppressive. Not only to nearly 50 percent of the population. (not counting those whoe don't realized that it is used primarily as birth control) but to the children that they seek to defend.

    I would love to see the practice largely ended for reasons of convenience, but I would be content to at least have a say in the issue on a government level.
    Last edited by ICantSpellDawg; 01-08-2008 at 22:34.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  15. #15
    American since 2012 Senior Member AntiochusIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Lalaland
    Posts
    3,125

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Oh please, Tuff. Don't try to excuse the social conservatives. They want to do what they want to do and no matter how much you say they don't want to do what they want to do it will change nothing.

    They want to legislate morality and that's how it is. Good or bad your opinion of course.

    The Reagan coalition is an unlikely one designed to bring down the New Deal-Civil Activists coalition from the Left. It succeeded.

    I wouldn't mind a realignment too much quite frankly. I can largely understand and accept the position of the fiscal conservatives while on the other hand diametrically opposed to everything social conservatives stand for. If Huckabee wants the social conservatives for himself, good for him and good riddance. I can find much more common ground with Don Corleone than I ever could with Jerry Falwell.

  16. #16
    Needs more flowers Moderator drone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moral High Grounds
    Posts
    9,222

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    I find it hard to believe that you can write that in good faith and not believe it about the Republican party.

    The democrats have seemed to find a candidate in record time. A simple realization of this tells me that there is more homogeneity in the party leadership than of the dems in the G.O.P.

    But still it isn't true. Both parties have very different viewpoints within them. To not realize that is odd.
    I believe I listed 4 different viewpoints within the GOP in my post. The party is more organized, and the usual party platform (even if it is full of lies) may be more palatable than the schizophrenia of the Democratic party. There tends to be more overlap in the beliefs and values. Most Republicans can at least be civil to each other, certain demographics of the Democratic party despise one another. They have turned into the catch-all party of the two party system. The GOP would be wise to recognize this, if one intra-party faction gets too powerful they may drive more members into the Democrats' clutches.

    And the Dems haven't found a candidate yet, they have the results of one state's caucus. As much as I have railed against the unfairness of the spread out primary/caucus season, winning one small state does not mean it's over yet.

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    Aside - Do you believe in forcing the taxpayer to fund abortions for the poor through a socialized medical plan?
    No, but that really doesn't have anything to do with my views on abortion. More on my views on federal powers.
    Last edited by drone; 01-08-2008 at 23:05.
    The .Org's MTW Reference Guide Wiki - now taking comments, corrections, suggestions, and submissions

    If I werent playing games Id be killing small animals at a higher rate than I am now - SFTS
    Si je n'étais pas jouer à des jeux que je serais mort de petits animaux à un taux plus élevé que je suis maintenant - Louis VI The Fat

    "Why do you hate the extremely limited Spartan version of freedom?" - Lemur

  17. #17
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by drone
    Most Republicans can at least be civil to each other, certain demographics of the Democratic party despise one another. They have turned into the catch-all party of the two party system. The GOP would be wise to recognize this, if one intra-party faction gets too powerful they may drive more members into the Democrats' clutches.
    THANK YOU - that is the point that I was trying to make and, I believe, the point of the article!

    It isn't that we don't have differences, it is just that we have struck a well founded balance that I believe to be threatened.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  18. #18
    The Black Senior Member Papewaio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    15,670

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    If social conservatives have "Hijacked" the G.O.P. then the social left has "Hijacked" the Democratic party. This is the reality in a 2 party system where 2 schools of thought are strongly at odds - they gravitate to one party or the other (with exception).
    The 2 parties are from an external perspective very close. They are fighting for votes so they have to appeal to the middle and not alienate their core.

    The 2 party system itself is a function of the voting system. If you want to change that dichotomy you will need to a use a different voting methodology.
    Our genes maybe in the basement but it does not stop us chosing our point of view from the top.
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
    Pape for global overlord!!
    Quote Originally Posted by English assassin
    Squid sources report that scientists taste "sort of like chicken"
    Quote Originally Posted by frogbeastegg View Post
    The rest is either as average as advertised or, in the case of the missionary, disappointing.

  19. #19
    Needs more flowers Moderator drone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moral High Grounds
    Posts
    9,222

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    THANK YOU - that is the point that I was trying to make and, I believe, the point of the article!
    The article is saying that, but I couldn't let the "They want the government to primarily stay out of their lives" bit go without comment. They want that, but only if the government can force everyone else to live like they do.
    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    It isn't that we don't have differences, it is just that we have struck a well founded balance that I believe to be threatened.
    But this party harmony is not going to last long anyway. Many social conservatives are fed up with the GOP's inability (or unwillingness) to push their agenda through, while the rest of the party is struggling with the conundrum of punting them completely to make the GOP seem more sane without losing the votes. The fiscal conservatives are fed up with the deficits the party seems unwilling to control when in power. The only guys happy are the Country Club Republicans, who have their tax breaks, are making money hand over fist, and pull the strings on the Democrats as well. Of course, they generally win regardless, but that's the game.
    The .Org's MTW Reference Guide Wiki - now taking comments, corrections, suggestions, and submissions

    If I werent playing games Id be killing small animals at a higher rate than I am now - SFTS
    Si je n'étais pas jouer à des jeux que je serais mort de petits animaux à un taux plus élevé que je suis maintenant - Louis VI The Fat

    "Why do you hate the extremely limited Spartan version of freedom?" - Lemur

  20. #20
    Master of Few Words Senior Member KukriKhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    10,415

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by Papewaio
    The 2 parties are from an external perspective very close. They are fighting for votes so they have to appeal to the middle and not alienate their core.

    The 2 party system itself is a function of the voting system. If you want to change that dichotomy you will need to a use a different voting methodology.
    As how one is paid largely determines how one works (how hard, for how long, with what priorities),

    The 2 party system itself is a function of the voting system. If you want to change that dichotomy you will need to a use a different voting methodology
    is a truth the US won't examine (again) until some scandal erupts - and certainly not in the middle this round of horserace.

    Still, despite crying in the wilderness, your truth-talk is noted.
    Be well. Do good. Keep in touch.

  21. #21
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Sure. The Republicans and Dems could fragment if the focus groups weren't so small. In the U.S., you have alot of specialization. People with 1 plan for one or two things. They can't hope to run a government that way, so they need to form coalitions and hopefully form a common policy.

    Right now you are starting to see libertarians break away due to the increasing big government positions of the G.O.P. - Much smaller and less powerful, but still possibly effective in the future. The Liberal Dems in the UK is a similar example of a third party that (after it's huge fall from major UK politics due to a Labour sweep) was a small party that has gradually grown into a nearly viable political entity again.
    Last edited by ICantSpellDawg; 01-09-2008 at 15:34.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  22. #22
    Filthy Rich Member Odin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Just West of Boston
    Posts
    1,973

    Default Re: I <3 Huckabee

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    Right now you are starting to see libertarians break away due to the increasing big government positions of the G.O.P. - Much smaller and less powerful, but still possibly effective in the future. The Liberal Dems in the UK is a similar example of a third party that (after it's huge fall from major UK politics due to a Labour sweep) was a small party that has gradually grown into a nearly viable political entity again.
    Very good example Tuff.
    There are few things more annoying than some idiot who has never done anything trying to say definitively how something should be done.

    Sua Sponte

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO