Huck’s Surge Continues Despite Critism by Conservatives

13 12 2007

Filed under: Huckabee, Romney, Giuliani, Politics, Election, 2008, Conservatism, Media

Conservatives who prefer a Republican nominee other than Huckabee may have shot themselves in the foot with their constant blogging criticism instead of following the lead of their arch rival, the infamous mainstream media, who have been largely ignoring Huckabee’s faults in recent weeks in an apparent assumption that, should he win the Republican nomination, he will be “easy picking” for Hillary. Additionally, some in the media have kicked around even promoting Huckabee to an extent in order to increase the chances of an easy win for Hillary while the DNC is also withholding criticism.

Democrat party officials are avoiding any and all criticism of Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee, insiders reveal.

The Democratic National Committee has told staffers to hold all fire, until he secures the party’s nomination.

The directive has come down from the highest levels within the party, according to a top source.

Within the DNC, Huckabee is known as the “glass jaw—and they’re just waiting to break it.”

In the last three weeks since Huckabee’s surge kicked in, the DNC hasn’t released a single press release criticizing his rising candidacy.

The last DNC press release critical of Huckabee appeared back on March 2nd.

Obviously, the DNC doesn’t see the threat of Huckabee the same as liberal bloggers.

About two weeks ago Rasmussen released their first Iowa Caucus poll which showed Huckabee with a lead over Romney. Since then Huckabee has more than doubled his support in Iowa – from 16% to 39%! All in spite of the dirt dug up and flung on him by fellow conservatives that doubt his “electability.” Huckabee also leads in South Carolina and is tied for the lead in Michigan. Can that many Americans in different parts of the country be fooled that badly?

In a CBS News/NY Times national poll, Huckabee has chomped up a significant portion of Giuliani’s lead which is now down to 22% to 21%.

Huckabee’s ascent in the polls is a mystery to the media and some conservatives, but very much expected for Christians who see Huckabee as a true conservative on core social issues, which are prerequisites for other topics. Yet, Huckabee has been assailed during his surge with a reverse religious test that denies any definition of religious beliefs:

In various settings over the last few days Huckabee has been confronted with articles from nearly a decade ago containing statements on the morality of issues like HIV-AIDS, homosexuality and even the need for spiritual awakening in America. He was basically asked to recant. I am pleased to say that he did not recant.

This morning, for example, the lead story on Drudge was a 1998 article from the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reporting on a speech that Huckabee gave at the annual meeting of the Southern Baptists calling on the church to wake up following a rash of school shootings. The Drudge headline touted, “Take this nation back for Christ,” a subtle but clear warning to secular elites. Columnist Richard Cohen wasn’t as subtle last week when he said Huckabee is climbing in the polls because of “his obdurate and narrow-minded religious beliefs.”

There is clearly a reverse religious standard being applied to Mike Huckabee, a standard that says there will be no defining religious beliefs. I would hope the other candidates, including the Democrats, would clearly and absolutely denounce this reverse religious test and keep the media from going further down this path.

Recent history says they won’t, which is ok for Huck. All it will do is open the flood gate of Christian support for Huckabee that will more than likely make these last two weeks a drop in the bucket compared to the sea of support he will receive.

I find it ironic that some conservatives are now making the same declarations about Huckabee that social conservatives were making only a few months ago about Giuliani. Well, almost. We’d only vote for a third party. Never Hillary.

That Presidential “R” in 2008 will stand for nothing I believe in. The guy is slick but doesn’t even look competent. And if Republican primary voters are that stupid, they deserve to lose next Fall. To pass over McCain, Thompson, Romney and Giuliani ONLY because someone’s slick and a Jesus Freak, which makes him your average televangelist – forget it. I will hold my nose and either vote for the Democrat because I prefer to know what I’m getting, even if I’m getting screwed, or a Third Party conservative if one comes up.

Only with Huckabee, I believe much of their fear is unfounded and well out of proportion. What is truly unfortunate is that Huckabee is even more conservative than Bush on most of the issues that are important to these conservatives. These conservatives have been hurt by Bush so badly on a few fronts (immigration and fiscal policy) that they don’t value two crucial positives (Supreme Court nominees and pro-life). I certainly understand voting for a third party candidate, but I’m stunned to hear conservatives talking about voting for Hillary instead of Huckabee, should they be the nominees. There is a severe disconnect and a lack of understanding of conservatism if that actually occurs.

Looking at Huckabee, the most glaring negatives are immigration, taxes, and maybe crime. If Huckabee could secure the Minutemen Founder’s endorsement, shouldn’t you believe it’s genuine after all the support you’ve given that organization? Apparently, frustration is being vented by lumping Huckabee in with Democrats, which is laughable. You obviously aren’t listening to Huckabee. Those concerned about his fiscal policies in the state of Arkansas should take notice of the net result of his governing which resulted in $380 million in tax cuts and an $850 million surplus. Not to mention his spending on the roads in Arkansas is not a representation of what he might do as President. If it’s the DuMond case that has your knickers in a twist, you really should research this more. Clinton had more to do with this than Huckabee.

Several months ago, some conservative bloggers were critical of social conservatives looking to a third party if Giuliani secured the nomination. Now that the tables are turned, they should take notice of how this happened. Basic conservatism seeks to bring people up, while liberalism drags you down. Social conservatives have pushed Huckabee to the top by building him up and making him stand above the other candidates, while other conservatives are stooping to liberal methods and attempting to drag Huckabee down below the budget level containing their favorite(s).

Social conservatives, whether other conservatives like it or not, carry a large portion of the Republican party’s voting block. They were crucial to handing Bush both of his elections in 2000 and 2004. 2008’s election will be no exception, and frankly no one should be surprised that the socon’s have finally united behind one common candidate. They should have known Giuliani’s early lead didn’t include any socon unity. It was a pipe dream to think socons would enthusiastically get behind Giuliani with his gaping social holes.

I like Erick Erickson’s comment on how he feels defending Huckabee while he’s not even his preferred nominee:

There are attacks to be made on Huckabee. But I think most of those who are making them are only helping Huckabee because the snideness of their tone overshadows the accuracy of their attacks.

If only other conservative bloggers possessed as much of the force as yourself, Erick. Then again, there was only one Yoda.




Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: