Posted on 11/09/2007 9:23:53 PM PST by Def Conservative
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/09/video-club-for-growth-smacks-huckabee/
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
ping
Ouch
The liberal MSM must really think Social Conservatives are stupid. They keep pitching and pimping the Huckster hoping somebody will buy.
To be added please FReepmail me or OB1KNOB.
Double ouch. The gas hike was never on the ballot. He said it was.
The GOP base has sadly shrunk to religious conservatives and those who support the war. I'm not saying that the GOP should compromise on issues such as abortion or the threat that Islam poses, but surely they need to reach out to independents and libertarians on trade, spending, and taxes.
I see only Ron Paul and Fred Thompson having a legitimate chance of attracting the old Reagan coalition while retaining the core base of conservatives. The others honestly do not stand a chance.
Triple ouch.
I think you are looking at this wrong.
It would appear that both Social and Fiscal conservatives are being asked to either step to the back of the bus or get off the bus completely by the GOP elites.
However, I still know alot of people both in my family and out that believe in the Reagan model. I know that is just my small world, but hopefully, what we are seeing in the GOP world right now is a media created problem only and the 60+ % of the GOP that actually believes in both side of the conservative house will coalesce around one candidate, hopefully Fred, but definitely not Rudy!
What has Laura Ingraham been saying?
I’ve noticed that even the rhetoric is changing to marginalize the small government arm of the party. Contrary to the way big government republicans talk, the small-l libertarian wing of the party is not just about tax cuts, or even just about fiscal issues. Yet they have been throwing us tax cut bones for a long time, while increasing the size, scope and intrusiveness of the federal government in our lives. Now Huckabee comes forward, and he’s not even for tax cuts? Yikes.
I continue to hold to my belief that the divide between small government conservatives and social conservatives is mostly a media creation designed to break the Reagan coalition. Yes, there are some libertines and statists on both sides...but the majority of my social conservative real-life friends and FReeper friends want the government out of their business almost as much as I do.
That said, I think there’s a real possibility that the Reagan coalition will fail in the next election, and possibly permanently.
She has been calling the Club For Growth, WSJ and other fiscal conservative groups “the elites” because they dare to focus on fiscal issues and fiscal issues only and has been acting like the social issues are the ONLY issues.
I believe social conservatism ties right in with fiscal conservatism.
She also blasts Rudy (and rightfully so) for not being conservative enough, but plays softball on Huckabee. I’d dare say Rudy, on the issues, has more conservative views than Huck...even with his liberal social views—and that’s saying something.
She almost seems like she’s saying being pro-life and against gay marriage makes you conservative automatically. In other words-being a social conservative and fiscal liberal makes your conservative but being a social liberal and fiscal conservative makes you liberal.
This break up with the Reagan coalition is kinda sad.
Thanks for the info. That is depressing, and a real shame.
I agree that social conservatism and small government conservatism go hand in hand. Social conservatives who don’t believe in small government conservatism would do well to take a look at what happens to religion and freedom of conscience when government gets too big (they don’t even have to look too far, since some of that is happening right here). Small government conservatives who scorn social conservatism would do well to think about why totalitarian societies try to either stamp out religion or co-opt it — because religion freely practiced by private citizens is a powerful counterweight to government domination.
Blah — ending my rant now. It’s sad, because I can’t envision the political coalitions that will form if the Reagan coalition breaks down for good. I suppose some folks on the social end might go with the blue dog democrats, and some on the small-gov end might go with the libertarians....but the blue dogs seem to have little power among modern dems, and the big L libertarian party has a lot of problems both ideologically and organizationally. Ugh.
Thanks for posting the video. I saw it earlier. But it should get wide distribution not only because it shows Huckabee to be a high taxer, but even more importantly, it shows a credibility gap in this guy as wide as the Grand Canyon. He is strictly a creature of the MSM, a liberal in prolife clothing, one whose sole purpose is to split the social conservative vote.
Note how the elites pick Huckabee (a transparently fake conservative) to accomplish their purpose, instead of Duncan Hunter, for example. The elites would never select an authentic conservative, even to do their dirty work. They always default to the ersatz variety. Their contempt for genuine conservatism runs deep, which is why they despise Fred Thompson with a passion, much as they detested Ronald Reagan. The Eastern elite establishment is rotten to the core. One of the reasons I like Thompson so much is that his victory will poke a huge finger in their eye.
Bump
>>She has been calling the Club For Growth, WSJ and other fiscal conservative groups “the elites” because they dare to focus on fiscal issues and fiscal issues only and has been acting like the social issues are the ONLY issues.<<
You don’t think that amnesty is a “social issue?” Remember that WSJ has shamelessly pimped for amnesty.
If she is really pushing for Huckabee, sounds like she is being inconsistent. I think if Huckabee were POTUS he would be like Bush on amnesty, just from Huckabee’s past statements.
I don’t listen to Ingraham all the time, but I don’t remember her clearly saying she is for Huckabee.
“If she is really pushing for Huckabee,”
She is not.
Of course I think amnesty is a social issue, but for her to chide Club For Growth for not calling candidates on it is ridiculous. Social issues are not the Club For Growth’s issue. It would be like a right to life group calling candidates on their fiscal records.
She’s been EXTREMELY soft on Huckabee. If she is basing her criticism on conservative records, she should at least be as hard on Huck as she is on Giuliani. But it seems just because Huck is pro-life he deserves better.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.