Posted on 01/29/2008 11:55:19 AM PST by Sideshow Bob
Wow what a twist! The other candidates were talking about a disaster relief fund, and Huckaby said rather than a handout, he would rather put the funds to work building road infrastructure. And from the context of the speech, I take it the road he wanted to add lanes to, are badly congested.
I don’t believe you have ever listened to James Dobson. He is not egotistical in my book, and I would like some proof to back up this smear of yours. I think egotistical applies to you if you wrote this. Dobson is concerned about the family and the soul of America.
McCain ain’t gonna make it...
Tick Tick Tick...
KABOOM!
Rudy is all dressed up with no where to go.
How the bloody hell did it get down to this.
No wonder I am so cynical, yet hopeful down the road...
I need a drink...
Better make it a double while I can afford it.
Haley buddy, I am counting on you....
no, they were talking about tax cuts. watch the debate again
If you want to "wrest leadership" from anybody else, you have to have a candidate, otherwise, it just won't stick.
Talk of mistakes and the notion that Iran-Contra cost Reagan his coalition or conservatives their control of the party is mistaken.
There just wasn't a Reagan in the race in 1988, so conservatives, Republicans, and Americans made do with G.W.H. Bush.
It was like that in 2000 as well, and it's the same way today.
There just isn't anyone as conservative as Reagan with the same appeal that Reagan has in the race.
Gingrich probably should have run for President himself in 1996 (Mistake #12).
If he had run that would also have been Mistake #12.
And what did conservatives get for 2008 GOP candidates? Were there any Reagan conservatives who possessed all three legs of the coalition stool - strong national defense, social conservatism, economic conservatism?
Clearly not, but could there have been?
Christianity has a social side that can't be denied forever, so naturally Evangelical social conservatives and laissez-faire economic conservatives wouldn't always be in the same boat.
A coalition involves fudging things as well. For a long time it meant making noises that appealed to social conservatives without making real concessions to them. Eventually either they'd get their way on things or they wouldn't and somebody would be alienated.
"Economic conservatism" mixed free marketeering and low taxes with some protectionist gestures and social programs to win over those who weren't converted. At some point there were bound to be conflicts about that, and about deficits as well.
It's also harder to campaign on a strong national defense when we're involved in an unpopular war.
at least if the GOP is going to lose anyway, better to lose with mccain?
Only problem with your theory is that Dobson didn’t endorse Huckabee or anyone else. The last part of your post is fantasy. Thompson lost because he was lazy, ran in only one state, and when the going got tough . . . he gave up and left conservatives in the lurch. Substitute “trusting Fred Thompson and supporting only Thompson instead of promoting another conservative into the race” as a mistake for the last few paragraphs and I think it makes as much sense as your historical analysis (which is excellent and not just guessing).
Um, except for that little issue that McCain is not AS liberal (or is MORE conservative) than Hillary. Liberal-Conservative is better thought of as a continuum, not an either/or. I’d rather have Thompson than McCain; I’d rather have McCain than Hillary; I’d rather have Hillary than Michael Moore; I’d rather have Michael Moore than Joseph Stalin.
“Sometime after mid-January ‘09, if the Fairness Doctrine is fully implemented and illegal immigrants are also allowed to vote in all future U.S. elections, then how is both the Republican Party and all of U.S. conservatism not completely destroyed forever”
Conservatism (obviously) does not reside in a political party. It resides in the hearts of men, and it cannot be squelched.
Our country was founded on Christian and Conservative ideals, by men who would not accept the government’s status quo. We will carve out a place again, if necessary.
Weren’t they talking about the “tax rebate” (which is a far cry from a tax cut)?
“Then you have evidence that Dobson is not a true evangelical Christian?”
That’s not what I said, now is it?
But, no, I don’t like Dobson. He’s a smary, holier-than-thou, prima donna who demands that politicians pay respects.
Thompson blew Dobson off as an ass (a correct assessment, IMHO), and, alas Dobson responded by saying he doubted Thompson was a Christian, a very unique theological perspecive.
...if the republicans expect the evangelicals to show up and vote and shut up (which I do not think you are saying), then it will be disaster for all conservatives (a lot of social conservatives will stay home). Dobson in my opinion went too far, (basically saying, if not my way, I withhold my endorsement (the same thing Rush is threatening)); but none of these candidates except Hunter are totally conservative. I will vote for any pubbie at this point because I do not want one more liberal justice. We can survive a McCain or Huckabee presidency...
***
Just to note, Fred repudiated his former support for McCain-Feingold from Day 1 of his presidential campaign - if not earlier. It represented a deviation from his core federalist principles.
No, conservatives and/or the GOP shouldn't take evangelicals for granted. But I don't think that it is too much to expect evangelical leaders to understand the political process and to learn to form winning conservative coalitions.
Dobson should have agreed with Thompson on all issues except:
1) Dobson's contention that Fred was not a "true" Christian, and
2) Dobson's belief that fealty to the Human Life Amendment is the ONLY way to attack Roe v. Wade.
Issue 1 made Dobson a religious bigot. Issue 2 is a losing political fight right now in this country.
As for McCain or Huckabee, I think both would be disasters for the country. A McCain nomination will forever split the Rpublican Party. And a Huckabee nomination would forever brand conservatism with a Theocracy scarlet T among non-evangelicals while Huckabee actually set the country on A European Social Democrat agenda. Further, on judicial appointments, I would be skeptical of a President McCain's appointments and doubtful that a President Huckabee's first choices (or second or third) would ever be confirmed.
I agree with your rankings . . . including the shocking fact for Freepers that Huckabee is the most conservative candidate still in the race. Except . . . I think Obama is just as liberal as Hillary.
bump for later study.
"MR. RUSSERT: You all have described yourself as tax cutters, and yet in your records there are shortcomings on that issue.
Governor Huckabee, are you comfortable with the fact that Governor Romney raised fees a quarter of a million dollars as governor of Massachusetts? Do you trust him as a tax cutter?
MR. HUCKABEE: You know, it's going to be really more do the voters trust him, and do they trust me. I know this: I balanced a budget every year I was governor. I left a surplus of $850 million coming up from a deficit of $200 million. I know I signed the first- ever broad-based tax cuts. And I know that I made tax cuts that really impacted families by eliminating the marriage penalty, doubling the child care tax credit, raising the income level at which people paid their income tax.
But let me speak to the really heart of what I think a lot of Americans are concerned about with the economy. And frankly, in talking about the stimulus package, one of the concerns that I have is that we'll probably end up borrowing this $150 billion from the Chinese. And when we get those rebate checks, most people are going to go out and buy stuff that's been imported from China. I have to wonder whose economy is going to be stimulated the most by the package.
And I'm grateful that something is being done. I think we all could at least acknowledge that it's good to see Congress working with the president to do something.
But if we're going to spend $150 billion, I'd like to suggest that maybe we add two lanes of highway from Bangor all the way to Miami on I-95. A third of the United States population lives within 100 miles of that.
This nation's infrastructure is falling apart. And if we built those lanes of highways -- with American labor, American steel, American concrete -- I believe it would do more to stimulate the economy.
And the reason I say that is because when we were going through a recession in my state, we were in the middle of a billion-dollar highway construction program that brought about 40,000 jobs and brought a billion dollars of capital into the economy. That's a long- term stimulus package that I think would have more impact on the American long-term future. And it would keep social capital from being wasted, fuel wasted. A lot of people in Florida sit around in traffic every day, never getting to their kids' dance recitals or soccer games because they're stuck in traffic, and we've done nothing about it.
If I had to make a call I’d at least want Mitt incase we won.
I was really reading this and trying to believe... until ya got to the “bed time story telling land of make believe”... ala Fred Thompson.
All you Fred Heads pretty much get the fact that Romney IS Giuliani and that he’s just lying about it...
But so is Fred.
Fred IS McCain... and the problem isn’t that others aka Dobson didn’t like Fred or as the other post says Fred was “too” conservative.
No... outside of the deluded here, NO ONE LIKED FRED!
Fred got at BEST 3rd place and sometimes 6th out of 7 with only Duncan Hunter behind him.
Wacky Ron Paul beat Fred in more than a couple states and he’s still IN.
Sorry guys and gals... Fred vanished because he WAS NOT FOR REAL.
And the only difference between us... you and me.... is I KNOW it to be true... and yer still in denial.
But everything else in this article is right... and we better be HOPING we Nominate McCain,....
Why?
Cause then those RINO PUKES LOSE AND GET BLAMED !!
If we Nominate Huck, the Evangelicals get blamed...
If we Nominate Romney, then Anyone who has Money can flip flop and BUY the election...
Nope... McCain is our only toxin potent enough to KILL the GOP quickly enough to RESUSCITATE it.
Anyone.... ANYONE else... is slow poison.
Christianity has a social side that can’t be denied forever, so naturally Evangelical social conservatives and laissez-faire economic conservatives wouldn’t always be in the same boat.
-
I don’t think this must be the case. Though obviously I can’t speak for evangelicals or christians...I consider myself to be a very strong social conservative who understands you can’t change behavior by force. Education is at the core of my conservative approach.
see my post and a response:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1960918/posts?page=33#27
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1960918/posts?page=33#33
Very good article.
I agree that the Ayatollah Dobson is most to blame.
Fred made some tactical mistakes ( skipping the Ames straw poll & the New Hampshire debate ), but I don’t think they were the real reason he and we lost.
Dobson lost all of my considerable respect for him at that point. Got a little whiff of power with Robertson going off the reservation and Falwell departed. And he thought he was going to be the show. Just powerful enough to be deadly.
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.