Cato Scholar Comments on Huckabee's Iowa Victory

http://www.cato.org ^ | Jan 4, 2007 | David Boaz

[Maelstorm]

Cato Scholar Comments on Huckabee's Iowa Victory

Friday, January 4, 2008

David Boaz, executive vice president:

Republicans looking for a presidential candidate to inspire them are now faced with a tax-and-spend religious rightist who would have the federal government regulate everything from restaurant menus to local schools. As Dorothy Parker would say, "What fresh hell is this?"

---

Cato's executive vice president David Boaz has played a key role in the development of the Cato Institute and the libertarian movement. He is a provocative commentator and a leading authority on domestic issues such as education choice, drug legalization, the growth of government, and the rise of libertarianism. He is the author of Libertarianism: A Primer, described by the Los Angeles Times as "a well-researched manifesto of libertarian ideas," the editor of The Libertarian Reader, and coeditor of the Cato Handbook on Policy . Boaz is the former editor of New Guard magazine and was executive director of the Council for a Competitive Economy prior to joining Cato in 1981. His articles have been published in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, National Review, and Slate. He is a frequent guest on national television and radio shows, and has appeared on ABC's Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher, CNN's Crossfire, NPR's Talk of the Nation and All Things Considered, John McLaughlin's One on One, Fox News Channel, BBC, Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and other media. His latest book, The Politics of Freedom, will be published in February.

Media Contact: 202-789-5200
To Book a Speaking Engagement: 202-789-5226
E-Mail: dboaz@cato.org

[Maelstorm]

I was listening to a CATO institute this morning on WRVA. Huckabee got an "F" from the institute as the "Huckabee: The Biggest Big-Government Conservative"

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316496,00.html

[dforest]

Fact is, he ain’t no conservative. What is wrong with these people?

[reasonisfaith]

Is it possible Huckabee is to the left of Jimmy Carter?

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Ah yes, the pro-gay CATO Institute who is just fine and dandy with a social liberal.

[MHGinTN]

The operant porition is, Huckster is right of Mitt Romney. Iowa is a liberal to moderate state. The Huckster will not be so fortunate in the liberal state of NH because there are not the required number of Christians who abhor a Northeastern Liberal like Romney. Look for NH to be a McPain then Romney finish, with Fred at Third again. Eventually, sane Republicans will be counted and expect to see Fred come out ahead of Huckster and McRomney. If not, the GOP is in deep trouble for the general in Nov.

[Always A Marine]

Ah yes, the pro-gay CATO Institute who is just fine and dandy with a social liberal.

That's a ridiculous charge -- the CATO Institute is not pro-homosexual. CATO's purpose is focused on economic and political freedom, and does not advocate involvement of the federal government is the private lives (i.e.: non-public behavior) of individual citizens. Human nature being what it is, it wouldn't take long for a dictator who shares my views to be just a tyrannical as a dictator with opposite views. I would argue that today's homosexuality is more of a symptom than the underlying problem, and that the solution lies in the attitudes and behavior of moral people -- acting on their faith, not through the coercive power of secular government.

C.S. Lewis saw this clearly back in 1930, when he wrote:
"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals."

[sourcery]

The GOP is composed of multiple factions, each with its own
priorities. Unforntunately this election cycle, too many members of
the various factions in our coalition are seeking their own faction’s
ideal candidate, without regard to the opinions of other factions. The
only result of such an attitude will be the destruction of the
coalition that is the GOP.

We must unite behind a candidate that is at least acceptable to all
the major factions, and who also has a reasonable chance to run an
effective, winning campaign in the general election.

[KantianBurke]

Not sure why there’s so much surprise at the Huckster’s rise. He’s essentially Bush’s ideological heir. Both are big govt “compassionate” conservatives who voice religious nonsense ad nauseum.

[Gipper08]

Tell me...what did that Socialist Huckabee do to advance LIFE in Arkansas?

He had 10 years. What % of Arkansas was Pro-life before the socialist Huck and what percentage after?

Even if the Huck cared about Life he would still be a socialist.

[Hugin]

Is it possible Huckabee is to the left of Jimmy Carter?

Of course not. The reaction hyperbolic reaction of many Freepers to Huckabee is frankly ridiculous. Look, Fred would be my first choice, and I hope he somehow pulls it out. And Huck has made a handful of statements that are problematic for me, especially his ideas about negotiating with Iran and holding a summit meeting with Iraq's neighbors. But he also supports winning in Iraq, fighting Islamofascism aggressively around the world, and increasing the size of the military. Hardly Jimmy Carter.

Huckabee also has a good policy on immigration. True, he did support in-state tuition for children of illegals, but as a governor he had no direct responisbility for enforcing immigration laws, so I don't really see his plans for the Federal government in that area as contradicting that position. In fact, it just might that he would take his oath to "see that the laws are faithfully exercised" seriously.

Huckabee is also clearly the most pro 2nd Amendment candidate in the race, with the possible exception of Fred Thompson. He is way better on gun rights than Mitt or Rudy.

As far as big government meddling in peoples business, it doesn't get any worse than the IRS. How is it libertarians won't give him any credit for wanting to abolish an agency that demands full access to every financial transaction in your life, and requires you to turn over all related documentation any time they want it, with no evidence of wrongdoing? Regardless of whether you support the Fair Tax, that's hardly a liberal idea.

I really think that instead of just calling him a "liberal", "socialist", "Jimmy Carter", etc. you might want to at least go to Huck's website and read his actual positions on the issues. I think you will find he is a lot more conservative than some people would have you believe.

[Hugin]

Please ignore the few errors in my post (should be “faithfully executed”, etc.). You get the point.

[Free Vulcan]

Iowa is NOT a liberal to moderate state. We are a populist state. That manifests itself in both parties in different forms. For the GOP it’s evangelicals, for the Dems the best I can put it is New Deal legacy populism.

Most people are a mix of both sides populism to varying degrees. Mix even isn’t the right word, it’s more of a bipolar thing. I know people that are hard core conservative on one issue, New Deal liberal the next, God knows what the third. But the thread that ties them usually is populism.

It all makes sense if you view it through a populist lens. Well, most of the time. I’m a 6th generation Iowan and some days I don’t get it myself. But one thing’s for sure, Iowa is NOT moderate. The closest thing I can come up with is a Truman Democrat/libertarian hybrid, and that’s not really accurate. You don’t really see too many true liberals or conservatives here.

Reps voted Huckabee for one reason and one reason alone: IDENTITY POLITICS. He was a preacher who spouted Christian values. People swooned and no one heard anything else after that. Some even know about his record but still voted for him because they wanted to give liberals the bird.

Whatever you do don’t read to much into the Iowa caucus results. Or at the very least understand that sometimes the winners aren’t always the winners or the losers the losers.

[MHGinTN]

The fact that Iowans keep sending the catholic in name only bleeding heart liberal Dungheap Harkin back to the Senate time after time is a huge evidence that the state is largely liberal, more than populist, IMHO of course.

[Free Vulcan]

Most don’t know he’s that liberal. All they see is the guy that is pro-ag and has lots of tenure. They send Grassley there for the same reason.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Ah yes, the pro-gay CATO Institute who is just fine and dandy with a social liberal.

As long as homos aren't demanding special rights and taxpayer monies, in addition to unlawfully targeting children, who cares what they do?