Each one of us needs to care, else the People will get the leaders they deserve.
The mission of TALK CITIZEN is to get people involved and thinking about the issues, the leaders, the possibilities (good and bad), engendered in our politics. No one likes politics, or so they claim, but politics has become embedded in every thought, action, and deed today. So whatever your stance, you would be wise to get to know our Body Politick.
I'm glad the American people are at least involved again with politics. For too long, they have let it take its own course. THAT is what brought us to where we are today. It is our own fault. No one else's. So I have no patience with those naive enough to believe it was Bush or Clinton or whomever that got us to where we are today. To that I say, RUBBISH! The road to fixing this broken system starts with accepting the blame and changing our own behaviors. Each and every man and woman in America.
Instead of running around blaming everyone and everything else, I am making the declaration that I blame myself FIRST. Nothing of substance is possible until I first make that declaration. So I'm getting involved as a way to change myself first! I hope you decide to get involved, too. Each one of you is smart enough. Each one of you is experienced enough. And each one of you makes the choice with every argument whether you fight with the Truth or with Mud and Mist. Had enough Mud and Mist. Let's take back the High Ground and make our arguments and win every time. THAT is precisely what the bullies and the despots fear the most!
It's not about our position or even winning. It's about working through our democratic process, reshaping it with the essence, heart and soul of the American people, to fit the times, to make the best life possible for Americans and the world's people. It's about taking the time to learn about the concerns of others in our world and not being judgmental about that as a first reaction. With that approach, we can change the world.
There is a great amount of interest in this year’s presidential elections, as everybody seems to recognize that our next president has to be a lot better than George Bush. The Democrats are riding high with two groundbreaking candidates — a woman and an African-American — while the conservative Republicans are in a quandary about their party’s nod to a quasi-liberal maverick, John McCain.
Each candidate is carefully pandering to a smorgasbord of special-interest groups, ranging from gay, lesbian and transgender people to children of illegal immigrants to working mothers to evangelical Christians.
There is one group no one has recognized, and it is the group that will decide the election: the Angry White Man. The Angry White Man comes from all economic backgrounds, from dirt-poor to filthy rich. He represents all geographic areas in America, from urban sophisticate to rural redneck, deep South to mountain West, left Coast to Eastern Seaboard.
His common traits are that he isn’t looking for anything from anyone — just the promise to be able to make his own way on a level playing field. In many cases, he is an independent businessman and employs several people. He pays more than his share of taxes and works hard.
The victimhood syndrome buzzwords — "disenfranchised," "marginalized" and "voiceless" — don’t resonate with him. "Press ‘one’ for English" is a curse-word to him. He’s used to picking up the tab, whether it’s the company Christmas party, three sets of braces, three college educations or a beautiful wedding.
He believes the Constitution is to be interpreted literally, not as a "living document" open to the whims and vagaries of a panel of judges who have never worked an honest day in their lives.
The Angry White Man owns firearms, and he’s willing to pick up a gun to defend his home and his country. He is willing to lay down his life to defend the freedom and safety of others, and the thought of killing someone who needs killing really doesn’t bother him.
The Angry White Man is not a metrosexual, a homosexual or a victim. Nobody like him drowned in Hurricane Katrina — he got his people together and got the hell out, then went back in to rescue those too helpless and stupid to help themselves, often as a police officer, a National Guard soldier or a volunteer firefighter.
His last name and religion don’t matter. His background might be Italian, English, Polish, German, Slavic, Irish, or Russian, and he might have Cherokee, Mexican, or Puerto Rican mixed in, but he considers himself a white American.
He’s a man’s man, the kind of guy who likes to play poker, watch football, hunt white-tailed deer, call turkeys, play golf, spend a few bucks at a strip club once in a blue moon, change his own oil and build things. He coaches baseball, soccer and football teams and doesn’t ask for a penny. He’s the kind of guy who can put an addition on his house with a couple of friends, drill an oil well, weld a new bumper for his truck, design a factory and publish books. He can fill a train with 100,000 tons of coal and get it to the power plant on time so that you keep the lights on and never know what it took to flip that light switch.
Women either love him or hate him, but they know he’s a man, not a dishrag. If they’re looking for someone to walk all over, they’ve got the wrong guy. He stands up straight, opens doors for women and says "Yes, sir" and "No, ma’am."
He might be a Republican and he might be a Democrat; he might be a Libertarian or a Green. He knows that his wife is more emotional than rational, and he guides the family in a rational manner.
He’s not a racist, but he is annoyed and disappointed when people of certain backgrounds exhibit behavior that typifies the worst stereotypes of their race. He’s willing to give everybody a fair chance if they work hard, play by the rules and learn English.
Most important, the Angry White Man is pissed off. When his job site becomes flooded with illegal workers who don’t pay taxes and his wages drop like a stone, he gets righteously angry. When his job gets shipped overseas, and he has to speak to some incomprehensible idiot in India for tech support, he simmers. When Al Sharpton comes on TV, leading some rally for reparations for slavery or some such nonsense, he bites his tongue and he remembers. When a child gets charged with carrying a concealed weapon for mistakenly bringing a penknife to school, he takes note of who the local idiots are in education and law enforcement.
He also votes, and the Angry White Man loathes Hillary Clinton. Her voice reminds him of a shovel scraping a rock. He recoils at the mere sight of her on television. Her very image disgusts him, and he cannot fathom why anyone would want her as their leader. It’s not that she is a woman. It’s that she is who she is. It’s the liberal victim groups she panders to, the "poor me" attitude that she represents, her inability to give a straight answer to an honest question, his tax dollars that she wants to give to people who refuse to do anything for themselves.
There are many millions of Angry White Men. Four million Angry White Men are members of the National Rifle Association, and all of them will vote against Hillary Clinton, just as the great majority of them voted for George Bush.
He hopes that she will be the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, and he will make sure that she gets beaten like a drum.
I wish that this issue would be recognized by the Presidential candidates so that it could be debated and voters could make an inteligent choice. Chuck Grapes, HighPtFarm@aol.com
" . . . Whether or not the peak in world oil production has already happened or will happen sometime in the near future, we are already seeing its effects on a number of levels both in the US and worldwide. Food, raw materials, money, they all become more difficult to access in a time of constricted energy supply. The wealth of energy oil has been providing to us for the last 150 years is now being taken away. We are at the point in history where we must begin to chart a new energy future with new and different kinds of energy. It will be anything but easy. Perhaps, this is the defining moment of the 21rst century, if not that of modern human history. Can we step away from our dependence on fossil fuels without wrecking our civilization, culture, and planet? Or will we, as many have warned, return to a new dark ages?
"It's possible, just possible, that oil industry executives are sounding the alarm. They would like to warn us in plain terms what we're facing but are constrained by the interest of their boards of directors and major stockholders. Perhaps we should listen a little more carefully and think about what it all means for us as individuals, families, and as human beings. A chance for each of us to show our quality and, maybe, just maybe, preserve an ounce of prosperity for our children."
While watching the debate last night I couldn't help but notice a strategy employed in football - that is, dominating the clock. A strategy masterfully demonstrated by John McCain, supported by referees refusing to flag any personal fouls, or make any holding calls. Senator McCain took every opportunity he could to take control of the clock, by turning every response into a slow-spoken long-winded recitation of his stump speech, and even though he continued to mischaracterize Mitt Romney's position throughout the night, in what could be compared to verbal holding (at least I felt like I was being facemasked), with his petty argument over timetable semantics, the moderator, Anderson Cooper refused to break it up or penalize anyone. In the end it seemed as if the Senator was really more interested in keeping his face in front of the camera, and taking time off the clock, than making a real point. And so McCain managed to dominate, not with any flashy plays, or great feats of political athleticism, but by keeping the ball on the ground (some would say "in the dirt") and just pounding it down everyone's throat.
But this primary contest is not simply about rooting for one team or another to win, with no real consequences to our lives Monday morning. This is a serious contest for the leadership of the most powerful and influential nation on earth, with consequences that will last for at least the next 4 years, if not much longer. If this is what our political debates, and nominating process have come down to, as Ron Paul so eloquently pointed out,"rather silly, because they're arguing technicalities of a policy they both agree with….", with no real issues being debated in depth, then what do we have? Even after 20 debates, which should have given everyone enough time to really examine the candidates, their records, and their vision going forward, how much do we really know about these guys? It appears the two media-anointed "front-runners" are much more interested in spitting on each other than really engaging in important debate over policy and vision. Neither of those guys showed any admirable leadership qualities last night that would inspire votes for them.
That attribute, and not surprisingly for those who have been closely following him, was best demonstrated last night by Governor Mike Huckabee. While Romney, and especially McCain came across like a couple of teenagers with their "who said what, when" pettiness, Governor Huckabee, when he was afforded the opportunity to speak, eloquently spoke boldly about the issues America is facing today. No stump speach excerpts from him, but words passionately, and thoughtfully spoken from the heart. His responses to questions about whether or not the country is better off today, whether the proposed stimulus will achieve its purpose, how he would judge Russian President Putin, the value of human life, and military strength and strategy, showed a thoughtfulness, and understanding of conservative principles that hasn't been seen from a Republican presidential candidate for nearly 30 years.
Regardless of how the debate started, and progressed into a drawn out petty argument between media nominated "front-runners", it finished with inspiring words from a formerly obscure Arkansas Governor, reflecting on the man for whom the setting honored; that he was much more than a "policy-wonk", but a President who truly understood how great a nation we live in, and was able to unite Americans from all walks of life, and inspire them to achieve the greatness he so deeply believed was theirs to grasp. For our nation's sake, and the sake of mankind struggling for freedom the world over, let us pray that this primary contest, and ultimately, the election that follows finds it's way to the same conclusion.
Michael Gerhart Whately, MA
MAC IS BACK! 1/13/08, Howell, Michigan
I am writing this in a hopeful mood, having returned this afternoon from a John McCain town hall meeting in Howell, Michigan. WOW! What an uplifting experience to see so many American people gathering in one place to hear a presidential candidate speak to the people and answer questions! Meeting organizers were scrambling after over 1,000 people showed up when 200-400 had been expected! I told Gip, "It does me good to see more Americans involved with the process of electing our leaders." To which he replied, "They'd better be," reflecting his own concerns about the apathy that has long plagued observers of our political process in this country.
McCain appeared ON TIME, looking much thinner than he does on TV. He has a steady gait and a warm face and smile. We were less than 20 feet from him during the rally. I was impressed by several things:
His sense of humor and very quick wit. The hour and a half went very quickly even though we were standing to see him. He seemed genuinely patriotic and good, nationally and internationally wise and experienced.
He appears to be a straight shooter on all matters, simple or complex, answering some audience questions with a confident and affirmative, "I WILL," or "I DO." This in response to a man's questions about McCain's support of improvements to vets' health care system.
One priest stood up and asked a pointed question about McCain's blocking of a pro-life bill for some group in Wisconsin. Without missing a beat, and without apology or regret, he spoke with dignity about why he had done this, stating the group had passed big payola to congressmen to try to win the vote. He explained that this was not an honest attempt to influence legislation, and rather was yet another display of lobbying efforts gone bad, which he adamantly resists. What amazed me was how he could single out one specific incident in his voting record and remember vividly the details surrounding it, almost instantaneously. I was more amazed with that than with the actual response. Here is a man who truly is one of the worker bees in Congress. Only such a man could be so clearly on top of the details of the job.
On the economy in Michigan, he said the state could lead the green revolution if efforts were organized to take on that agenda from within the auto industry. He challenged all in the room to go to Cobo Hall's 2008 Auto Show and see for themselves what's possible and what the American companies are working on today. That tells me he'd been there but not for reasons of fanfare, but to learn.
On health care, he was obviously as upset with the current system as the rest of us, vowing to hold the big drug companies' feet to the fire. "Why," he asked, "does new technological breakthroughs in the medical field cause costs to go UP, while in all other industries, it causes costs to go down?!" He wants every citizen to be able to cross state lines to obtain competitive health care insurance, not be restricted as we are now.
Federal spending. He's obviously livid about the way both parties have contributed to a bloated federal government, citing wrong doing with specific examples on both sides.
The War in Iraq. He vows never to draw down troop strength until Gen. David Patreaus and only the general says to do so. He obviously has a great following in the military community with his background and experience. He talked about how he made his own party angry when he stood up and claimed Rumsfeld's DOD plan for the war was clearly not working. He said the media wasn't the problem. The strategy was the problem. And on Osama, he said radical Islamic movements were one of the - if not the- greatest threats to the security of the nation. He said he would find Osama, and with a confidence I believed, he further claimed, "...and I know how to do it!" Intriguing.
On rebuilding trust in our institutions. He said the key to this was "transparency in all matters except national defense." Period. He said important decisions that affect the people should not be used as bargaining chips in back rooms in the dark. He also supports line item veto and explained to the crowd why the Supreme Court shot down the last attempt to bring it back -- "...the bill was written wrong, but we need to try again." On the topic of pork, he claims never to have put forward any piece of legislation that had "earmarks" associated with it. Unlike the most recent action where 10 earmarks attached to the Iraq spending bill added another 10 BILLION to the budget deficit. He was clearly frustrated and displeased with this, citing this as why our future generations could be saddled with crushing debt if this practice continued.
On illegal immigration. One elderly woman kept waving her hand to ask a question. McCain finally said he would take one more before he had to go, and that he had to let this woman speak. She asked if he would be so inhumane as to send illegals back to Mexico. He told her most tenderly that we should never reward someone for doing anything illegally. He said 2 million of the criminals illegally in the country would be deported immediately, while the rest would be sent back on a category by category basis after first securing our borders. He made many jokes about Arizona, and on this one, he said AZ has lots of experience with securing the border; so he knows how to handle that.
Environmentalists were there. One asked about diverting water from the Great Lakes to AZ. He said he is hoping that big pipe would come out right at about his back yard. Then said more seriously that in AZ, the trees chase the dogs looking for water and not vice versa, and that he'd never want that for the Great Lakes states.
In a very short while, we in the room had been exposed to John McCain, the man, the statesman, and the veteran American. There were many in the room with their service medals, hats, and even uniforms. Clearly, he resonates with many different types of people. His demeanor was not at all confusing or arrogant, nor his position on the issues troubling. I could see this man as my President. In a short period of time, we in the room had gotten the cliff notes version of John McCain's beliefs and values and a good test of his work ethic. I felt a little like we in the room were there working with him to sort out the problems and reach best consensus on how to proceed, whatever problems or concerns were raised by the group. He was clearly leading though, always level-headed and quietly forceful or decisive. I enjoyed the afternoon!
Tomorrow, I will try to get to see Huckabee in Michigan. It is time for me to make a decision. Both men will ask for my vote. But only one may have it. Who will it be? Soon, I will know. If you haven't attended a pre-primary rally, do so when it's your state's turn to cast votes. Despite all the media available, it's still better to go and be there in person, looking the man or woman in the eye, to try to learn where they really stand and how they truly feel about being an American. With McCain, I was proud to be in the same room with him. I hope you have the chance to see your favorite candidates on the road. Next time, I'm taking the grand kids. :) They would find the palpable patriotism and famous American anthems, playing over the loud speakers, rousing! Which in turn would make them curious. Exactly the emotion I want to evoke! -Sharon
Even If He Loses Nomination, Huck's Drive Helps G.O.P.& His Country
By Michael Medved Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Despite his current standing in the polls, Mike Huckabee remains an under-funded and chronically disorganized long-shot when it comes to actually winning the GOP Presidential nomination. While easily the most gifted TV communicator in the field, the former Arkansas governor displays some serious vulnerabilities as a candidate for the White House and his innumerable critics and rivals have attacked these weaknesses with gleeful ferocity.
Even if he fails to win a place on the national ticket, however, Huckabee’s startlingly strong campaign provides potent benefits for both his party and his country. In the two weeks remaining before the Iowa Caucuses it’s worth considering how the Man from Hope 2.0 has already strengthened the GOP.
1. HUCKABEE’S COMPETITIVE STATUS PROVES THAT MONEY ALONE CAN’T BUY A PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION. In Iowa, Huckabee enjoys a substantial lead (over Mitt Romney) while national polls show him virtually tied for first place with Rudy Giuliani. He’s achieved this success – so far—despite the fact that Romney outspent him in Iowa by a ludicrous ratio of at least 20 to 1, and his national fundraising has lagged far, far behind Romney, Rudy, Thompson, McCain and even Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo. There’s simply no modern precedent for a candidate with so few financial resources making himself such a major factor in the primary process. Even those who dislike or distrust Huckabee, ought to acknowledge that his vigorous campaign helps the cause of wide-open, participatory democracy.
Countless cynical citizens say they won’t take part in politics because it’s all dominated by corporate interests and big money contributors. Huckabee, however, manages to compete for the prize despite a total absence of major corporate support and pathetically limited funding. If nothing else, his serious race to the White House ought to destroy the myth that a “little guy” can’t compete with “the big boys” when it comes to a national campaign.
2. THE HUCK-A-SURGE GIVES THE LIE TO THE CLAIM THAT THE GOP IS CONTROLLED BY OUT-OF-TOUCH ELITES. The image of a political operation dominated “Country Club Republicans” has done incalculable damage to the party. You’d have to be deaf not to hear the complaints about “the party of Wall Street” taking the place of the “Party of Main Street.” In that context, Huckabee is undoubtedly Main Street and the Wall Street Journal hates his guts. The current President is the third generation in his family from Skull and Bones at Yale; if Hillary won the White House (God forbid!) it would mean that five of our last seven presidents (Ford, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, and Clinton II) boasted Yale degrees. The Huck-meister on the other hand is the first male in his family’s history ever to graduate from high school -- an unimaginable tribute to the American dream. He didn’t do his undergraduate work at an Ivy League school, but at Ouachita Baptist University.
Among elite commentators and prominent conservative opinion leaders, Huckabee has won no supporters and only one defender (the radio host writing this commentary). For answering those who claim that planet earth groans under the control of some secret cabal of Bilderbergers, Illuminati, the CFR, Trilateralists or neo-cons, it’s useful to point to the current situation where a complete outsider with no globalist ties manages to shake up the Republican power structure (Yes, he’s outspokenly opposed to the Law of the Sea Treaty). While providing new excitement, energy and unpredictability to the Republican race, the affable Arkansan has pulled ahead of any and all of the Establishment’s favored candidates – showing that this establishment is vastly less omnipotent and fearful than previously assumed.
3. HUCK’S CAMPAIGN DEMONSTRATES THAT THE SO-CALLED “CHRISTIAN RIGHT” IS MORE COMPLEX AND DIVERSE THAN COMMONLY ASSUMED. The silliest and most misguided commentary about Huckabee suggests that his appeal arises solely out of his background as a Baptist pastor. In a typical column, Peggy Noonan writes in the Wall Street Journal: “The Republican race looks – at the moment – to be determined primarily by one thing, the question of religious faith… Mike Huckabee is in the lead due, it appears, to voter approval of the depth and sincerity of his religious beliefs as lived out in his ministry as an ordained Southern Baptist.” This is nonsense, of course. Evangelical voters may play a disproportionate role in giving Huckabee the lead in Iowa and South Carolina, but they can’t readily explain his similar polling advantages in Michigan, Delaware or Florida. The truth is that the polls indicating Huckabee tied with Rudy for the national lead indicate that his support is evenly divided between those who describe themselves as Evangelical Christians and those who identify with some other religious tradition or no faith at all. Not all Huck’s supporters are Evangelical, and not all Evangelicals support Huckabee.
In fact, very few prominent Christian Conservatives have endorsed the Arkansas Traveler – Romney in particular has drawn back from more famous Evangelicals than has Huckabee, while many others support Thompson, McCain or even Guiliani – just ask Pat Robertson. In other words, contrary to the Washington Post’s infamous (and long ago) description of Christian conservatives as “poor, uneducated and easily led,” the Evangelical community is decidedly split in this campaign. In addition to its other revelations, the Huckabee campaign shows that conservative Christians represent no dangerous or monolithic cult, but a diverse, complex and politically maturing community. If nothing else, the Huckabee campaign has provided a means for some disillusioned members of that community to rally behind a Republican candidate who offered a genial alternative when all his rivals seemed unacceptable for one reason or another.
Huckabee’s critics should acknowledge these contributions even while they continue their fierce assault on the candidate’s statements and record. For several reasons, it’s a bad idea at this stage to try to knee-cap or smear or discredit the former Arkansas governor, finding (or manufacturing) an endless stream of bitter charges meant to cripple him permanently.
Most obviously, serious political players ought to recognize the real possibility that Mike Huckabee will be on a national ticket at some point – if not as a Presidential nominee, then as a Vice Presidential candidate, and if not in 2008 then in some future election (Huckabee is only 51 – the only one of the GOP “Big Five” below the age of 60.) Even if his current campaign falters or collapses, he’s run such a remarkable race that he’s certain to remain a factor in national politics for many years to come. Republicans gain nothing by trying to discredit an individual who has earned, like it or not, his status as one of the party’s prominent leaders.
At the same time, Huckabee’s competitors should attempt to keep any attacks focused and fair. In that context, Governor Romney just sent out an especially nasty mailer comparing Huckabee to one of his predecessors as Arkansas governor, Bill Clinton—a particularly low blow for Republicans. In this context, Romney’s propaganda slams Huckabee for supporting “amnesty for illegal aliens” --- without acknowledging that the former Arkansas Governor now supports an immigration plan even more unyieldingly hard-line than Romney’s (you can read all about it on Huckabee’s website). Governor Romney insists on his own right to change his mind on big issues (including abortion, gun control, gay rights, and even immigration—where as recently as 2006 he publicly supported a “path to legalization” that he now derides as “amnesty.”) If Romney wants people to focus on his current positions, not his past statements, then is it fair to deny the same consideration to Huckabee?
Finally, party leaders should try to avoid the impression of “ganging up” on Huck because they will need the voters he’s been able to mobilize. There’s no doubt that Huckabee has inspired and energized many citizens who hadn’t been excited by any other candidate. Republicans will seek those voters in November, not just in the Presidential race but in a horde of Congressional and statewide contests.
It won’t help to insult those Huckabee loyalists by describing them as religious fanatics, or anti-Mormon bigots, or ignorant rubes, nor does it make sense to treat their candidate as some sort of embarrassment or a pariah. Huckabee served ten-and-a-half years as a successful and popular governor (including his experience as lieutenant governor, he boasts three times the service in public office as Romney, and considerably more time as an elected official than Thompson, Hillary, Edwards or Giuliani). While arguing about the best candidate, and the right approach to the issues, all major contenders deserve respect and appreciation their achievement in deploying viable campaigns and engaging the public in the most wide-open, unpredictable presidential race in memory.
Michael Medved, nationally syndicated talk radio host, is author of 10 non-fiction books, including The Shadow Presidents and Right Turns.
Be the first to read Michael Medved's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.
There are mutterings in the ranks of social conservatives. For nearly thirty years, those who joined to Republican party primarily to stop the slaughter of the innocents -- but also to support traditional marriage, fight pornography, oppose judicial activism, and protect Second Amendment rights -- have been good soldiers.
They have voted by the millions for candidates who were first and foremost economic conservatives, even libertarians, contenting themselves with a few rhetorical crumbs. They have embraced candidates who have had a change of heart on the life issues, such as Bush Senior. They have even gone along with candidates who have suddenly announced that they have had the political equivalent of a death-bed conversion--an election-year epiphany on the evil of abortion.
Now one of their own, Governor Mike Huckabee, has sprinted into the lead in Iowa. And some economic conservatives, their supposed allies, are savaging him for-of all things -- not being conservative enough.
There is a double standard at work here. For the sake of party unity, social conservatives are being told by some, they are supposed to overlook Giuliani's public immorality and pro-abortion activism. But because the Arkansas legislature responded to a court order to spend more on education and raised the state sales tax, Huckabee is irredeemable, even though he refused to sign the final bill. Social conservatives are supposed to accept Romney's political-death-bed conversion to the pro-life position, but Huckabee's commitment to low taxes and limited government is constantly questioned, even though he has signed a no-tax-increase pledge and-alone among the candidates -- is vigorously campaigning to abolish the IRS.
So why is it that when one of our own breaks out of the pack, social conservatives are asking themselves, so many people are piling on? Part of the answer is innocent enough. Huckabee's surge comes so late in the game that most conservative leaders and many groups are committed to other candidates. The National Right to Life Committee, for instance, endorsed Thompson thinking that he would be the front runner. Instead Thompson no sooner announced his candidacy than his poll numbers began to drop, undercut by his lackluster performance on the stump and his brain freezes during the debates.
A month ago, Pat Toomey of the Club for Growth could dismiss Huckabee, then polling in the single digits, as not ready to "run with the big dogs." Now, however, with the "big dogs" all doing a fourth quarter fade, Huckabee has sprinted to the head of the pack in Iowa and elsewhere. If this continues, we will soon be treated to the spectacle of some of the erstwhile leaders racing to follow their followers.
But it is also true that social conservatives have long been regarded as the junior partner in the Republican coalition. The moneyed, secularized Republican elite distain evangelical Christians, in particular, as poorly educated and easily led. They are good enough to help with voter registration drives, hand out flyers at the mall, and vote the right way at election time. But then they are supposed to go home and let the really smart people-those who know that they only important things in life are money and power -- run things.
How many conservatives remember that Reagan was initially opposed by the big money people, and that the Republican party establishment was far from united behind his candidacy? It was a groundswell of support from Joe Sixpack and his wife that won Reagan first the nomination and then the presidency. Similarly, Huckabee's candidacy has flourished because of support from the rank and file, while a sullen party establishment looks on in stunned disbelief.
Republican kingmakers seem to have missed the deep similarities between Huckabee and Reagan that are so apparent and appealing to ordinary people. But it is precisely these similarities that explain Huckabee's sudden rise, and may well propel him into the Oval Office. What are they?
First of all Mike Huckabee, like Ronald Reagan, is a man of genuine convictions, and is entirely comfortable with himself. This comes through in his smile, in his naturalness, in his ready answers to questions.Romney, on the other hand, when asked a question, seems to be sorting through file cards to find the politick answer.
Like Reagan, Huckabee is a man of deep faith in God and in America, and is not afraid to publicly defend his beliefs. Cynical political types tend to dismiss this. The American people, who know that character counts, don't.
These traits explain why Huckabee's performance in each and every presidential debate-even the early ones, when few questions came his way-has been so outstanding. He has proven so articulate on the issues that the other candidates-watch them-are often forced to grin and shake their heads in admiration. Some, unable to help themselves, actually applaud when he finishes.
He also shares with Reagan the gift-rare for a politician-of being humorous and decisive at the same time. I am reminded of an earlier presidential debate when Walter Mondale attempted to bring up Ronald Reagan's age as an issue. "I won't use my opponent's youth and inexperience against him," the Great Communicator quipped in response.All Mondale could do was grin helplessly. Issue closed, permanently.Huckabee has the same knack of using humor to take away issues from his opponents.
Finally and most importantly, Huckabee is right on the issues. He equally and eloquently defends the right to life of the unborn, and the right to bear arms of the people. He is pushing for the abolition of that most-hated American institution, the Internal Revenue Service, and its replacement by a simply and fair levy on consumption. As a former governor, he talks about rejuvenating the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution by ceding authority back to the several states. He is a friend of Jeffersonian democracy and a foe of the centralization of power in Washington. If all this isn't Reaganesque, what is?
I knew Ronald Reagan. I once even had the honor of writing a speech for him. And I admit that Mike Huckabee does not have the same star quality about him as the late great President. Who does? But Huckabee has the same ah-shucks demeanor, the same unforced eloquence, and the same grace and good humor under pressure. And increasing numbers of ordinary Americans-the same good folks who voted for Ronald Reagan by the millions-are mighty impressed.
In this space, we will collect summary data such as the data presented at the link below for candidates' stand on illegal immigration and other issues of importance in the 2008 run for president. Check here before you vote! ====================================
“History does not entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid.”~Dwight D. Eisenhower Copyright 2007-2008TALK CITIZEN ™ is a trademark of LobaTek Incorporated
