Huckabee: I’m A Divider, Not A Uniter

By
January 18, 2008

There was absolutely no reason for Huckabee to bring up the Confederate Flag issue in South Carolina, especially with such a coarse remark destined for a Democrat commercial in the Fall should Huckabee ever get the nod. The issue was resolved at the State level back in 2000. Huckabee is simply trying to pry an element of the white vote away from McCain because of the kerfuffle over the flag before and after he ran against George Bush. This is not the tactic of a man whose primary claim to fame and electability is having once been a man of the cloth. Huckabee’s piety seems matched only by his ignorance and imprudence. There’s good reason for concern over the type of president that would make. Not even a southern man needs this clown around this primary anymore.

“You don’t like people from outside the state coming in and telling you what to do with your flag,” Mr. Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas, told supporters in Myrtle Beach, according to The Associated Press.

“In fact,” he said, “if somebody came to Arkansas and told us what to do with our flag, we’d tell them what to do with the pole; that’s what we’d do.”

Please consider supporting RiehlWorldView with a small donation
, by shopping at Amazon via our Associate link in the sidebar or by re-distributing our content across the Web with the options below. Thank you.


Comments:
  1. Retread says:

    Huckabee gets scarier by the day. Rather than it being clear that his faith gives him strength and the sort of tolerance Jesus advocated, I’m beginning to wonder if he is turning into the wild-eyed, fire and brimstone type that puts people off religion rather than drawing them to it. More and more he’s showing he doesn’t have the judgment to be trusted with the White House, IMO.

  2. Cincinnatus says:

    He’s trying to pick up Ron Paul votes. The flag should have been gone after a little event at Appamatox. Since he’s so worried about being heavy-handed, I’m sure he’ll be light as a feather when he forces SC to stop smoking.

  3. Anonymous Coward says:

    As a Jewish republican, I’m not feeling part of the big tent. From the beginhing, the Huckster has not been welcoming to me. If it’s between the Huckster and the Hillster I’ll just stay home and cry on election day.

  4. Unbelievable. I’m beginning to think that all who are supporting Huckabee will realize who and what he is just a little too late.
    If this liberal in “conservative” clothing gets the nomination, you can put a fork in the Republican party – because it’ll be done.
    I’m waiting for the Huckabee imposed theocracy… and as a Catholic – it’s obvious that only certain religions mean anything to this guy. If your not Christian, or the wrong kind of Christian you need not apply.
    I never thought I would have to dust off the establishment clause of the Constitution argument in my own party.

  5. Dan Fittro says:

    Okay, so all the Conservative social things he’s saying don’t count for anything? Those were SUCH a huge deal in the past couple of election for our nominees. I don’t understand how people keep implying he’s not a conservative.
    At the end of the day it seems like, people are saying values shmalues. If he isn’t putting money in my pocket, screw our values.
    He’s conservative.

  6. Fred Beloit says:

    Seems I remember this “conservative” on a video saying things like this: OK, you suggest a higher tax on tobacco. I can like that. Or a surtax on taxes. Why peachy keen. I love that. A nice big tax on books. Great. I support that.
    Some conservative.

  7. anon says:

    1) Mr Huckabee, what, exactly, would you tell them to do with the poll.
    2) Is your answer likely to bring glory or shame to the lord you follow?

  8. Sierra Faith says:

    Huckabee: Republicans’ Al Sharpton

    More from Dan Riehl.

  9. Dan Fittro says:

    Fred> So is your point then that all that stuff 4 years ago when we were beating the streets to ban gay marriage, all the fights over abortion, all of it…now matters not at all? Those were such huge deals at the time.
    And then you have someones like McCain, Romney, Guiliani who are all questionable on those issues.
    Now when it comes to money, like I said, it looks like all of it was just a bunch of BS to trick evangelicals into voting for Republicans. This is shameful now or it was shameful then. I don’t know which but it’s really really disheartening.

  10. Gullyborg says:

    “Okay, so all the Conservative social things he’s saying don’t count for anything? Those were SUCH a huge deal in the past couple of election for our nominees. I don’t understand how people keep implying he’s not a conservative.”
    The problem with this argument is you act as though no other GOP candidates have conservative social views.
    Abortion – all are opposed except Giuliani, and he supports the idea of strict constructionist justices overruling Roe v. Wade.
    Gay Marriage – all are opposed. Sure, Romney was Governor in Massachusetts when they adopted gay marriage, but it wasn’t his doing. Remember, that was a court decision and Romney as Governor was legally bound to enforce it.
    Guns – Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter are both A rated by the NRA. Giuliani had a bad record as mayor, but he had to do some liberal things to get elected and STAY elected in NYC. Now he says he would fight for gun rights. Romney, McCain, and Paul are all iffy on guns, but are all clearly superior to ANY democrat still in this race.
    So the GOP race is, for the most part, pretty good on the social triangle.
    But Huckabee is not conservative on:
    taxes
    spending
    immigration
    defense
    foreign policy
    the environment
    AND, he approaces two of the three legs of the social triangle – babies and gays – in a divisive manner. Other candidates can address these issues without basing their ideology on what God said. If “God” is your ONLY argument, you lose because there is no one consensus approach to religion in this country. Huckabee pisses of non-evangelicals. His arguments would be like Giuliani or JFK making policy decisions because “the Pope told me to.” His arguments have the moral equivalence of al-Qaeda saying “Allah commands us.”
    I loathe and despite Mike Huckabee – and I am socially conservative Christian. If he is the nominee, I’m voting libertarian.

  11. johnbrown says:

    Gullyborg is making sense here. Being from a Catholic part of New York, I think Republicans write off Rudy Giuliani without understanding our context. During the years he was mayor (especially the first term) he was public enemy number one for the poverty pimps: it was difficult to read a newspaper, watch the TV, listen to the radio, or go on the internet without running into a hate-giuliani blurb, and a large part of the city took it for granted that he was a nazi (and I’m just talking about the “respectable”, Charles Rangel types).
    Given his first priority, reducing the homicide rate (which, at the time, was higher than in Northern Ireland, then in a state of civil war), there was a certain necessity in arguing for gun control (which the NYPD endorsed) or gay rights. Contrary to popular opinion, Rudy knows which fights must be won, and which ones must be compromised on. (I don’t like his outlook on abortion, but that’s an issue that won’t be resolved at the federal level.)
    (OK, personally, Rudy’s kind of annoying, but Al D’Amato and even Teddy Roosevelt were just as annoying. It’s a New York thing.)
    Fred Thompson makes out a good conservative case (when he actually campaigns); both Mitt Romney and John McCain are more eccentric, but let’s face the fact that they are conservative Republicans. I’d be much more comfortable with any of these men appointing a Supreme Court Justice than I would with Hillary doing the appointing. I don’t have any idea who Huckabee would appoint. (As for Ron Paul: I really don’t see how you can call yourself a Republican if you don’t like Abraham Lincoln.)
    Right now it looks like the Democratic Party is going to win the 2008 elections, possibly in a big way. The main reason for this is, I think, the GOP’s budget-busting policies, a number of indictments, and a failure to take a strong position on anything it was elected to do (whatever happened to school vouchers, which actually do help poor kids get a genuine education? Why not make it easier for law-abiding people to immigrate legally, while imposing real sanctions on employers and trespassers who break the immigration laws?). The Republican Party was born and raised as a party of class warfare, a party dedicated to the abolition of slavery and destruction of the “slave power”. It is sad, and a bit amazing, that it should now be seen as a tool of Wall Street even by those who belong to it.

  12. Random says:

    Huckabee has some scary opinions, but I will say this for him: he’s obviously not trying to hide how he really feels about these things. That’s gotta be worth some points.

  13. tally says:

    perhaps it’s my small libertarian streak, but i agree with huck on this one. they can fly a pirate flag for all i care, it’s their state. (p.s. huck’s never going to win the nomination folks)

  14. JC says:

    Huckabee is simply trying to pry an element of the white vote away from McCain
    The “white vote”? In a GOP primary? Isn’t that a.k.a. the whole vote?

  15. Philadelphia Steve says:

    Re: “Huckabee is not a Conservative”.
    Of course he is a Conservative. Mike Huckabee is everything the Republican Party has tried to portray itself as for the past thirty years. He is for Amending the Constitution to bring it in line with “God’s Law” (as defined by him, of course). He is for intruding the state into American’s personal lives (or at least the part of their lives that matter to him).
    What more do Conservative want?
    The “not a Conservative” part is just the cover that Conservatives use to deny accountability when their candidates actually turn out the way Conservatives say they should.