Huckabee Settles Scores With Fellow Republicans
How does this help Huckabee?
TIME--On Mitt Romney:
Mitt Romney
Huckabee writes that the former Massachusetts governor’s record was “anything but conservative until he changed the light bulbs in his chandelier in time to run for president.” He notes that Romney declined to make a phone call of congratulations after Huckabee beat the oddsmakers to win the Iowa caucuses, “which we took as a sign of total disrespect.” He mocks Romney for suggesting, during one debate, more investment in high-yield stocks as a solution to economic woes. “Let them eat stocks!” Huckabee jokes.
Fred Thompson:
”
Fred Thompson never did grasp the dynamics of the race or the country, and his amazingly lackluster campaign reflected just how disconnected he was with the people, despite the anticipation and expectation that greeted his candidacy,” Huckabee writes.
Conservative Christian Leader Gary Bauer:
[Had] an “ever-changing reason to deny me his support.” Of one private meeting with Bauer, Huckabee says, “it was like playing Whac-a-Mole at the arcade — whatever issue I addressed, another one surfaced as a ‘problem’ that made my candidacy unacceptable.” He accuses Bauer of putting issue of national security before bedrock social issues like the sanctity of life and traditional marriage.
John Hagee:
Huckabee speaks to Hagee by phone before the McCain endorsement, while the former Arkansas governor is preparing for a spot on Saturday Night Live. “I asked if he had prayed about this and believed this was what the Lord wanted him to do,” Huckabee writes of his conversation with Hagee. “I didn’t get a straight answer.”
The Club For Growth:
“I don’t take issue with what they believe, but the smugness with which they believe it,” writes Huckabee, who raised some taxes as a governor and cut other deals with his state’s Democratic legislature. “Faux-Cons aren’t interested in spirited or thoughtful debate, because such an endeavor requires accountability for the logical conclusion of their argument.”
November 18th, 2008 at 7:16 am
FYI
NO LOVE!
Huck unloads on Mitt; Romney camp hits back
November 19th, 2008 at 7:40 am
LOL! It looks like Huckabee is calling it like it is.
November 19th, 2008 at 8:42 am
Huckabee judging another’s conservativism…now that’s funny. Check his tax and spend record as governor of Arkansas, not much there to excite fiscally responsible Republicans.
November 19th, 2008 at 8:55 am
That’s pretty good stuff. Seems the only ones who actually adhere to Reagan’s 11th Commandment (”Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.”) are just too busy stabbing other Republicans in the back behind the scenes.
November 19th, 2008 at 9:38 am
Huckabee’s a child. He acted like a smarmy televangelist during debates and he’s acting like a cry-baby now. He never was a good candidate and probably ought to milk the TV show and book sales for as much as he can get because he’s done.
November 19th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Aubrey,
The entire GOP is pretty much the televangelist contention. What are you complaining about?
November 19th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
He accuses Bauer of putting issue of national security before bedrock social issues like the sanctity of life and traditional marriage.
There you have it folks: America First (after bedrock social issues like the sanctity of life) (and traditional marriage) !
America Third !
November 20th, 2008 at 12:51 am
“not much there to excite fiscally responsible Republicans.”
I’ve heard of these mythical creatures.
Don’t they ride unicorns and play with their leprechaun friends?
Maybe some day there will be documented evidence that these creatures exist…
November 20th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
You are correct CM.
A thought occured to me yesterday after reading a post on another blog asking for the name of one fiscal conservative in the U.S. Senate…the only name offered by a couple of posters was Tom Coburn of OK.
If the same question were posed about dems, ‘name a liberal senator’, the answer would be just about all of those with a D behind their names.
That is the difference in our two parties right now; dems pretty much adhere to their very liberal, big government ideals…unfortunately most GOPers adhere to the same beliefs as their political counterparts.
I look forward to a day (hopefully sooner rather than later) where the answer to the question about fiscally conservative Republicans will include far more than just ONE freakin’ U.S. Senator.
November 20th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
A story from Politico today points out the problems within the remaining GOP U.S. Senators who as a group still don’t get it:
Senate GOP in big funk
By: John Bresnahan and Amie Parnes
November 20, 2008 12:32 PM EST
A day after losing Ted Stevens’ seat, along with their best hope for getting Joe Lieberman to cross over, Senate GOP leaders preached party unity as the key to surviving the Obama years.
If that doesn’t work, there’s always psychotherapy.
Down to 42 seats with two still at risk, Senate Republicans are in a deep funk. Some are in denial. Some want a return to conservative principles. Some want to cut deals. Some want more filibusters.
Others want to jump out a window — but they’re afraid they’d screw that up, too.
“We probably wouldn’t die,” a Republican Senate aide joked Wednesday. “We’d just lie there, hurt and suffering, which is not too much different from where we are now.”
Two years ago, the Republicans held a 55-45 majority. They’re down 13 seats since then, with a too-close-to-call race in Minnesota and a runoff in Georgia still to come.
“The feeling I get is that we’re not ready yet to discuss with ourselves what happened,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, one of the few Republicans to win an easy reelection this year. “I think people are kind of still a bit stunned and are not prepared to have thought it through sufficiently.”
“We think the whole problem is George Bush and not us, and we’re part of the problem,” added Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina.
Although Republicans aren’t exactly anxious to align themselves with the outgoing president, they’re feeling so nostalgic for the power they once had that they’ve scheduled their committee organizing meetings for mid-December — an excuse to be back in town for Bush’s final White House holiday party.
John McCain — the Republican senator who had hoped to be hosting those parties for the next four years — returned to the Senate this week. He said Tuesday that he had nothing to say to the press. When reporters asked him for a comment on Wednesday, he said “No, no, no!” and kept walking.
The Republicans’ only glimmer of good news: When Stevens — the longest-serving Republican in Senate history — conceded his Alaska race to Democrat Mark Begich on Wednesday, he spared them the unpleasant task of having to expel him from their caucus.
That there is no simple solution for what ails the party is clear from the number of solutions offered to fix it. Ask a room of Senate Republicans what’s next for their diminished and deflated minority, and you’ll get a different answer from each of them.
During a closed-door Republican Conference meeting on Tuesday, DeMint offered proposals to impose term limits on the Republican leader and to restrict how long members can serve on the Appropriations Committee. The resolutions were soundly defeated, but not without bitter exchanges among the Republicans present for the meeting.
Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida said the meeting was “terrible” and “caused consternation” among his colleagues because of the dispute over DeMint’s proposals.
GOP senators met behind closed doors again on Wednesday and did a quick review of their races, with the leadership and defeated incumbents blaming Republican losses on the economic downturn and the president’s call for a $700 billion economic rescue plan.
But even this session brought a clash between GOP lawmakers, as Sens. David Vitter of Louisiana and Kit Bond of Missouri fought over whether Republicans should support a bailout of the auto industry, with Bond supporting it and Vitter opposed.
“Sometimes people don’t like change, but after two disastrous elections, we need it,” DeMint said. “We need to be who we say we are. The most important thing for the party is to mean something again.”
Retiring Sen. John Warner of Virginia — who will be succeeded next year by a Democrat, former Gov. Mark Warner — tried to lighten the mood Wednesday with some gallows humor.
Warner told of how he had gone to a straw poll in Virginia with McCain. Warner made a strong pitch for McCain at the event and figured he’d seal the deal by offering to pay for lunch for the whole crowd. When the voting was over, Texas Rep. Ron Paul had won.
“It was a really funny moment, but still kind of sad because it was true,” noted one senator.
So far, GOP leaders have remained upbeat. They point out that after the 2004 elections, Republicans held the White House and picked up seats in the House and Senate.
The leadership points to this as proof it can be done, and done quickly.
“You play the hand you’re dealt,” said Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, who is now vice chairman of the Republican Conference. “We’re not happy to be where we are, but we are where we are. Now you have to determine how you get back on top.”
Sen. John Ensign of Nevada, the outgoing NRSC chairman, said victories in the Georgia runoff and Minnesota recount, which Sen. Norm Coleman leads by 215 votes over Democratic challenger Al Franken, could help ease the pain by keeping Democrats from reaching a 60-vote, filibuster-resistant majority.
“Obviously, we were very disappointed by [the] Election Night results. Believe me, we put our heart and soul into this last two years,” Ensign said. Georgia and Minnesota “are absolutely the two that we feel like we have to hold onto to basically take away a good feeling from this cycle.”
But first, the Republicans will have to say goodbye to their own. On Wednesday night, just off the Senate floor, Republicans planned to gather in tribute to their retiring and defeated colleagues.
It’s a longer-than-usual list this year, and it includes Stevens, Warner, Pete V. Domenici, Elizabeth Dole, Wayne Allard, Gordon Smith, John Sununu, Larry Craig and Chuck Hagel.
“This causes a lot of pain,” said Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson. “There are a lot of good people there. We’re going to miss them all.”
November 20th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Mr. bb, you post some interesting items. Clearly, you are a republican, but I question your contention that you’re conservative.
In another thread, you seemed annoyed by the prospect that Cherokee County was further cracking down on illegal aliens. That, sir, is in no way, shape or form, a conservative position.
While your point about the federal government having a Constitutional mandate to protect the Nation’s borders is valid, it is the responsibilty of EVERY American to rid the Country of those who have no legal right to be here. After all, it does say ‘We the People,’ not we, the federal government.
I get the distinct impression you favor some kind of amnesty for these invaders and I’d remind you the republican party received a good (and well-deserved) spanking from grass roots America when it tried to force “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” down our collective throat.
When the republican party returns to the values and vision of our founders, and more recently, Ronald Reagan, perhaps then, the People will reward them with the honor of serving our Nation.
I’m well aware that Reagan signed amnesty legislation for 3 million illegal aliens, but the deal with the congress was to assure there would be no further amnesty. The party of Reagan has lost its way.
November 20th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
play with their leprechaun friends
Would that be taking place in airport bathrooms?
November 20th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
IB,
My point in the other thread was to oppose govt. forcing private business to fulfill the role of govt. through local ordinances.
If you believe a govt. that abdicated its primary responsibility can then pass the buck to small business, then my friend, you are the one who’s conservative values should be challenged.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:04 am
bb
You’ve got a good point: gov’t is getting into the business of business, and the one real job they do have - security and defense - they want to pass off to the citizens. Talk about a giant 180.
November 21st, 2008 at 4:20 am
Innocent Bystander,
” it is the responsibilty of EVERY American to rid the Country of those who have no legal right to be here. ”
Could you show us a copy of the Constitution, where it says that?
Mine is so old its still the original, which had absolutely nothing whatsoever to say about the subject at all.
November 21st, 2008 at 10:59 am
DOR,
Wow, you have a copy of the Constitution? That’s a shocker.
Why don’t you provide the portion that makes marriage a right. Or that says healthcare is a right.
November 21st, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Mr bb…….touche! (#16) I got a real kick out of that reply! I, too, was surprised to read that Mr. O’Rear has a copy of our Constitution.
Very well said!
I must, however, continue to disagree with your assessment on illegal aliens and the government. From a macro point of view, your point is valid. However, from the local, or micro point of view, the point is moot. If the federal government has either failed to do it’s mandated duty, or done so intentionally, it becomes incumbent on the People to get the job done and deal with the politicians later. It is OUR Country, not a king’s nor a politicians. Suggest a review of the Federalist Papers for more on the topic.
Incidentally, I really do appreciate the debate. It’s clear you’ve read out founding documents.
Mr. O’Rear, I refer you to the part about “providing for the National defense.” Further, it might surprise you to know that ‘We The People’ (AKA EVERY AMERICAN)ARE the government.
Still having some trouble understanding intent are we?
Tsk Tsk……Suggest a refresher on the subject. Focus on the writings of Jefferson and Joseph Story. Mix in a few dashes of John Adams,Samuel Adams, and perhaps a few speeches from Patrick Henry.
Maybe then I’ll consider whether you’re even worthy of debating the subject. You continue to display your ignorance of the topic, yet blather on as if you’re actually “up to speed” so to speak. For some odd reason, I doubt you’ll ever grasp the idea. Just as in the days of these visionary men, there were ideologues like yourself who were certain they knew better.
As Ben Franklin himself said, “Here comes the orator with his flow of words and his drop of reason.” I believe that’s a fairly accurate description of you sir.