Over in camp Huck we keep an eye on polls.

Not so much on the unscientific internet kind, (although those are fun too) as much as on the national polling done on the state of the race between the two presumptive nominees.

We’re not so blind in our support of Huckabee and our platform, as to not realize that McCain’s eventual pick for veep will be the one who can help him win, based on the strategic play for state flips between the two.

We were, as a result, pretty bummed to read after Ted Strickland announced he was taking himself off the table for democratic vp, that Obama seemed to be ceding the rustbelt to McCain and had started to float the idea of a strategy of trying to flip Nevada, New Mexico,Colorado, and other mountain west states. http://patriotroom.com/?p=432

Anybody with a political brain knows that’s advantage Mitt territory.

(And Nooo I’m not hating on Mitt, I’m just saying Mike’s my guy, so it didn’t feel great to see his chances appearing to slip away.)

Some may well say that the rustbelt blue states also play to Mitt’s strengths, and that may be true, but only if he runs in them as a ‘populist,’ fairly similar to how he ran in MI, and that didn’t go over so well with the fiscon wing of the base. And I don’t think he’d want to ’sully’ his conservative credentials for the future in taking that rout, but that’s just my opinion.

We think Mike is actually the stonger veep pick for the Penn/Ohio heartland pickups because of his significant appeal to Hillary’s blue collar crowd. (Mike’s true base was always more working class than ‘evangelical’.. class was the lowest common denominator across all of his support groups)

In fact, you could almost lay John King’s democratic and republican big boards over one another on primary nights and find an exact match between Mike and Hillary and Obama and McCain. There is no doubt that Hillary’s rural vote is going to be a serious game changer here.

But I digress..

Word was, McCain was holding the rustbelt on his own without veep help and Obama was turning his eyes west. It looked like Mike would get to keep his new day job at Fox after all.

And then came the latest round of polls: Former congresman John Leboutellier on his blog comments: http://leboutillier.blogspot.com/

The new spate of Quinnipiac polls from Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania have rocked the GOP political establishment.

Here is the brief overview from Quinnipiac:

This is the first time Sen. Obama has led in all three states. No one has been elected President since 1960 without taking two of these three largest swing states in the Electoral College. Results from the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University polls show:

Florida: Obama edges McCain 47 - 43 percent;

Ohio: Obama tops McCain 48 - 42 percent;

Pennsylvania: Obama leads McCain 52 - 40 percent.

In the three states, Obama leads McCain 10 to 23 percentage points among women, while men are too close to call. The Democrat trails among white voters in Florida and Ohio, but gets more than 90 percent of black voters in each state. He also has double-digit leads among young voters in each state. “Finally getting Sen. Hillary Clinton out of the race has been a big boost for Sen. Barack Obama. He now leads in all three of the major swing states, although his margins in Florida and Ohio are small,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

Believe me: these results - especially in Florida (thought to be secure for McCain) and Ohio (very winnable for the GOP - especially with Governor Ted Strickland stating he would not accept the Veep slot from Obama) - have shaken the McCain campaign and renewed the fear that an anti-GOP, anti-Bush tsunami is rolling in this fall - and it may take not only McCain along with it but dozens of GOP House and Senate hopefuls, as well.
 

It appears that Obama may be neutralizing some of McCain’s opportunities to pick up blue states. That leaves us status quo until you discover the progress that Obama is making towards flipping some states that went red in the last general election.

First, Iowa. Mccain didn’t really campaign there during the primaries, focusing his energies on NH. But it was unlikely,’white as the driven snow’ Iowa, that gave Obama his first big win and set him on the path to the nomination. They ‘know’ him, and like him there, a lot.

James Barnes in a National Journal article today reports:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/pi_20080621_5575.php
 

“Because Iowans have a relationship [with Obama] they’re less likely to buy into the negative imaging attacks that McCain and, especially, the [independent] ‘527s’ will do in Iowa,” Norris said. “Iowans are going to say, ‘This guy is not that; he won the caucuses.’ ”
 

And on Mccain’s chances:

If his campaign has sometimes created the impression that McCain is indifferent to Iowa, his opposition to popular subsidies at times has made him seem downright hostile to the state’s interests.

In opening a town hall meeting in Des Moines last month, McCain attacked another economic boon to the state, the farm bill with its many crop supports. Playing his favorite role of maverick, the Arizonan told Iowans that if he were president he’d veto the measure.
 

Iowa, is one reason McCain should give Huckabee a secod look for veep. The only way he is going to hold Iowa red, is if he can maximise the turnout in Iowa’s rural conservative base, and Huckabee has proven that he can do that on a dime.

Another recent polling indicator that may shift the veep winds Huckabee’s way, is bad news out of the south. Obama is now in a polling dead heat with McCain in Georgia, and showing signs of strengthening his positions in other swing states like Missouri.

From Insider Advantage 6/19: http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_619_444.aspx

June 19, 2008 — A New InsiderAdvantage / PollPositionsurvey conducted June 18 of registered likely voters in the November presidential contest shows Sen. John McCain leading Sen. Barack Obama by a single point in Georgia, making the race in Georgia a statistical tie. Libertarian Bob Barr, a former Republican Congressman from Georgia, received 6 percent of the vote.  The telephone survey of 408 registered likely voters is weighted for age, race, gender, and political affiliation. The survey has a margin of error of +/- 5%. It was conducted with InsiderAdvantage’s research partner Majority Opinion Research. PollPosition is InsiderAdvantage’s new branding name (look for additional information and expansion of PollPosition in the coming months). 

The Results:

McCain: 44%

Obama: 43%

Barr: 6%

Undecided: 7%

My view is that Georgia, the 9^th largest state in the nation with 15 electoral votes, will remain a major new battleground state through November. This changes the landscape of electoral politics as Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, and perhaps another surprise southern state, join Florida as potential “swing states,” that cannot be presumed to vote Republican in 2008.”

Now granted, earlier polling did not reveal as much strength for Obama on the southern front, but as they say, time heals all wounds, and some of Hillary’s voters may be going home.

There is a chance that the winds of change may blow through the polls once again, but as emotions stabalize after the bitter democratic primaries, I think the trends we are seeing will hold fast and expand.

That means, as of now, Mccain needs a vice presidential pick who can help him hold Iowa, as well as southern states that are trending Obama, he also needs someone with enough blue colar appeal to stengthen his chance of taking the rustbelt to counter any losses that he may absorb in the south/mountain west, (although, for the record USA Survey polling showed that Huckabee polled extremely well in many swing states not traditionally considered his forte. ) http://www.teamhuck.com/

SurveyUSA Polling Strongly Indicates that Voters Prefer Huckabee
6/3: Massachusetts Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Lieberman & Romney, 4th: Pawlenty

6/3: New York Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Lieberman, 2nd: Huckabee, 3rd: Romney, 4th: Pawlenty

6/3: Iowa Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

6/3: Kentucky Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

6/3: Alabama Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Lieberman & Pawlenty, 4th: Romney

6/2: Minnesota Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Pawlenty, 2nd: Huckabee & Romney, 4th: Lieberman

6/2: Oregon Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

6/2: Washington State Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Romney, 2nd: Huckabee, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

6/1: Nebraska Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

5/30: Wisconsin Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee & Lieberman, 3rd: Romney, 4th: Pawlenty

5/29: Kansas Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd:Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

5/23: Ohio Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Lieberman, 3rd: Romney, 4th: Pawlenty

5/21: California Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

There are many conservatives who do not like Huckabee on a personal or political level. But I think those seeking to put forward the argument that he brings ‘nothing’ to the table as a vp pick are living in dreamland.

Huckabee supporters  are prepared to accept the outcome if the path to victory overlooks picking Mike as vp. We may not like it, but would embrace any clearly pro-life vp in a heartbeat. The question is, would the rest of the GOP base get on board if the path to victory included accepting Mike Huckabee as VP. Sadly, I’m not so sure of that.

Time will tell the tale.

I don’t particularly like Townhall’s Matt Lewis.

He is one columnist who milked the Huckabee/Romney camp rivalry for all it was worth, writing provoking commentary designed to earn him hundreds of hits and hundreds of comments.

I guess that made him feel good about himself.

He’s at it again in his reaction to and ‘analysis’ of Huckabee’s advice to the GOP that we not try to win the election by ‘demonizing’ Obama.

http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/1b348839-9530-4db1-99a9-9b1986f2a9bd?comments=true#comments

Hummm.. patronizing?

It’s not patronizing if the republicans really need to hear the warning and apply it. We like to think we are above those types of obviously ‘cross the line’ tactics:

Try telling that to republicans forwarding emails that Obama is the Anti-Christ,

Or to talk show hosts who pretend that calling him Barack HUSSEIN Obama is not intended to produce a knee jerk negative response i a post 9/11 world.

Or to those same talkers doing everything in their power to imply that Obama hates America.

How about telling that to the Texas republicans at their convention who wore buttons saying ‘If Obama wins the white house, will it still be called the white house?”

I could never vote for Obama in a million years but we HAVE to find a way to fight him on the Issues, and not on his ‘patriotism, or try to play ‘guilt by association’  or by saying the terrorists will be dancing in the street if he wins, or by asking, is Barack really a muslim?

I don’t expect that McCain’s campaign will fight that front, but we ALL know the 527’s are going to find a way to go there, directly or indirectly.

Yes, these will evoke an emotional reaction, but it will happen on both sides of the isle. Sure you may convince a few republicans sitting on the fence to vote McCain, but at the same time you will convince millions more democrats who may be sitting on the fence that the GOP is playing true to its percieved fearmongering/bigoted form.

Obama will ALWAYS win if we try to battle him in the realm of emotion.. One soaring, ‘Still I Stand’ sppech will wipe away every doubt planted by 527’s dirty work. We cannot win on his turf.

He has to be defeated in the realm of REASON. Hillary took him to school on policy, she waited too late to find the key, but we would do well to learn from her mistakes.

Matt Lewis’s little dig at Mike produced the usual plethora of Huck Derangement Syndrome responses, including this little number:

The problem with what Huckabee said is that it reveals what he thinks of conservatives, that he believes that conservatives are racists that will resort to racist attacks on the first black presidential candidate, unless he staves them off with his pastoral wisdom.

So it’s not that I think he supports Obama or anything. He’s just once again revealing his contempt for conservatives, just like he did back in the primary.

Uhhh.. what?

Mike didn’t  ‘reveal’ his secret contempt for conservatives.

He made an observation based on tangible evidence of the direction that the GOP is thinking of taking in this election. He listen’s to talk radio, he saw the GOP ads that were run in the Southern special elections, which the GOP LOST, because they tried to run a negative campaign based on emotional guilt by Obama association.

I cannot emphasize enough how right Huckabee is on this subject. The GOP will LOSE in a landslide if they try to make this a character defamation ’swift boat’ campaign. Obama is no Kerry to take a hit laying down, and the backlash could propell him into the whitehouse.

And for the record, as once again Lewis’s post intentionally tried to make Mike into an Obama sympathizer, here is a comment from Jarrod, on the site, to provide some context of the further development of Huckabee’s thoughts on Obama.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

His Handmaiden

Why is it that folks see what they want to see in a story?

Blogospheric buzz reveals the Huck Haters on both sides of the isle rubbing their hands in glee at the thought that Huck has thrown in the towel and ‘moved on’ with his contracted gig to ‘contribute’ to Fox news Election Headquarters program.

Does no one realize that clauses can be built into a contract that would provide legal ways for him to exit the arrangement without liability? There is no way Huck signed that contract without a clause that gets him released in the event that he is selected as VP. He’s not stupid. Focused, ambitious..a political tactician..but not stupid.

In the meantime.. the naive drop their guard, thinking he is lost to the ‘entertainment’ element of the political game. In fact, with one brilliant move, he has positioned himself to get more involved than ever in this political cycle.

He gets free airtime to connect with a a faction of the GOP that was reluctant to embrace him, and his name recognition goes through the roof. The opportunity that Huckabee will get to peel away the layers of cricature that were painted onto his frame during the primaries is priceless. And by signing on with the network that could most easily disrupt his efforts to redeem his image, he has effectively silenced his biggest opposition. Fox has yet to eat one of its own.

With his natural ability to use the media to connect, Huck can use the summer months to make inroads with the GOP base that would make him priceless as a VP candidate for McCain, while providing him with a larger platform to continue his current PR surrogacy for McCain’s candidacy. There are a LOT of social conservatives who stopped watching Fox during the primaries who will tune in again, and many of them have yet to be convinced to support him fully. Huckabee can help bring those folks to water, even if he cannot make them drink.

And if he doesn’t get chosen.. he still has an open door into the homes of potential future voters.

The man is a political genius.. You don’t think he knew that Fox has been the network most biased AGAINST his candidacy? He could have gone with MSNBC and be subject to the continued accusation that he is a closet liberal.

Instead he has gone into the lions den to reshape the debate from the inside out. Just what his grassroots base is doing at the local level with the candidates endorsed and supported by his PAC

The establishment underestimates Huckabee at their peril. He is nobody’s fool.

You don’t get to the top without knowing how to the play the game, and Huckabee is proving to be one of the best at strategy. While some may sneer and call this ‘opportunism’ I can only shake my head in amazement. There is something in the water in Arkansas..lol

Good job Gov.

Today the congressional caucus of the GOP unveiled their “bold new economic plan” for stealing some of the wind from the democratic sails as we move forward into preparations for the general election. These plans included agressive proposals for finally pushing forward with oil and gas exploration and extraction, and a move towards long overdue tax reform.

“To protect consumers, the House GOP plan would harness new technologies and unlock America’s energy resources in the Alaskan coastal plain, deep ocean energy zones, and elsewhere to lower gas prices, create jobs, and break America’s dependence on foreign sources of energy. To protect taxpayers from pork-barreling politicians and wasteful Washington spending, our plan would establish an immediate earmark moratorium and prohibit federal spending from growing faster than the overall economy. And to protect American families and small businesses, the Republican blueprint would stop the Democrats’ largest tax hike in history, eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax, and give taxpayers the option of paying a flat tax and filing their taxes on a single page.”

http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93622

 

After taking a moment to give our people a mental clap on the back, frustration and to some extent despair reared it’s ugly head in my heart.

Our radical new plan, is in effect a watered down version of some of the platform issues that made Mike Huckabee so attractive to his supporters. The same Huckabee vision that was shot down by party elites as one that was not well thought out, or practically impossible to accomplish.

When I thought further of the tumultuous ride we have all been on in this econonomy and society in general these last crazy months of the political silly season, I found more and more examples of Huckabee’s foresight on issues that later came to be the talk of the day.

Let’s start with the economy. During one of the early debates, Huckabee was the only GOP candidate to answer a question about the state of the economy with a ‘non party line,’ but truthful answer. For the working class American, the economy was not doing very well at all; and he was right. Within a month of that debate, the sqeeze that the working class was feeling, had crept into the middle class sensibility, and the stock market was on the fritz. Now the struggling economy is “issue number one”.

On the war on terror, Huckabee wrote a comprehensive analysis of current strategy in the middle east, and proposed that we needed to be focusing more on Pakistan and holding them more accountable for helping us in the GWOT, given the amount of resources we are pouring into their coffers. He was ridiculed for suggesting that the Bush administration had a ‘bunker mentality’ to the war, and his position on Pakistan was laughed out of town. A few weeks later, Bhutto was assasinated, democracy took a few steps backward in Pakistan, and an environment of political unrest increased the chances that Pakistan would fall into the hands of the extremists in its midst. Who’s laughing now?

Anybody who ever watched a republican debate was sure to hear the mantra from Huckabee, ‘We need to be able to feed ourselves, fuel ourselves, and defend ourselves,” if we are to stay free.

He suggested, again to ridicule, that America needed to start exploring all options, alternative and fossil, to ensure our energy independence within ten years. He even went so far as to draw paralells with the pace of the progress that was made by Kennedy in the space race. He did not talk about long term planning, he talked about doing it NOW, and agressively. Now we are paying over four dollars a gallon for gas, and everybody wants to ‘Drill now” with the ultimate effect of possibly being energy independent within the decade.

Huckabee talked about the importance of being able to feed ourselves, and implementing policies that would insure that our food supply did not have to come from external sources. This may seem to be common sense, but he was the ONLY candidate, on either side of the isle to talk openly about food sustainability on the campaign trail. Now, the world is in the middle of a food crisis. Rice and flour are being rationed at Wal-Mart and Cost-Co. Food prices are going up in part because of poor policy implemented regarding biofuel mandates, and there are riots in the streets in developed and third world countries alike. why was Huckabee the only one with the vision to adress this critical subject as part of his policy platform?

Huckabee also talked about the danger inherant in outsourcing our self defense. Again, this was not part of ANY other candidates talking points on the stump. Along comes the scandal of the outsourcing of our fuel tanker pentagon contract to a European based company. Now ‘Outsourcing our defense’ is the latest buzzword on the talk circuit.

Huckabee was howled out of town for daring to suggest that our Tax system needs a massive overhaul. He was considered naieve for adopting a platform issue in the Fair Tax that ‘could never be passed.’ Well somebody needs to do something!! Tax reform MUST be on the agenda of one party or the other, and whoever latches on to it first will have a winning platform for years to come. It looks like the GOP is taking a step in the right direction with the disclosures in today’s statement.

Huckabee was the only GOP candidate to call the stimulus package the farce that it is, pointing out that it only stimulates the economies of the very countries with whom we have a terrible trade deficit imbalance. Many lauded, and some decried his suggestion that working on restoring our infrastructure would  stimulate our local economies, while providing jobs and strengthening the foundations that ensure our transportation veins remain open for commerce. The tragedy of the bridge collapse in Minneapolis. subsequently made the subject of our rotting infrastructure take center stage for weeks on end. Now many in congress on the left and the right are advocating for infrastructure development in their home states as a means of stimulating economic growth.

When all is said and done, time and time again, the wisdom and foresight that Huckabee has demonstrated in sensing what issues need to be highlighted and adressed is nothing short of astonishing. It shouldn’t be, he has governed for ten and a half years successfully, even if his detractors prefer the spin that he is a preacher on a political holiday.

It is high time that this man get some of the respect that he deserves for being a brilliant and visionary politician. If you’re going to adopt and implement his ideas, at least have the courage to admit that he’s not the ‘hick, knuckledragging, snake oil salesman, Huckabilly’ that so many of you, liberal and conservative alike, have deemed him to be.

America may never know the gem it lost by not having the courage to believe that somone so unorthodox, and yet so intimately connected with her heart, could make it all the way to the oval office. She may yet be lucky enough to benifit from his vision, if John McCain finds the courage in his heart to do the hard thing and offer him the veep spot.

I can only hope.

His Handmaiden

So now we know…. It will be Barack Obama and John McCain contending head to head in contest to be the president of these united states, and early polling seems to indicate that the vice presidential pick of each gentleman will have a significant influence on how each candidate fares in any number of swing states.

There is a chance, no one knows how great, or how small, that John McCain may decide that the former governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee, may be the person he needs on his ticket to give him the best chance at winning in the currently democratic friendly electoral environment.

There are many, many self described conservatives who have said this would be the last straw, that they would not vote for a McCain/Huckabee ticket. Much of this hostility is rooted in opinions formed of the man, out of the nuggets produced by opposition research in the primaries. Nuggets designed to paint Huckabee in the worst possible light.

Just as we have gone through the process of sifting through the partisan rhetoric to find the areas on which McCain and conservatives can agree, I believe that it is time to start making the case for acceptance of individuals who though not perfectly aligned with our multi-pronged philosophies, may perhaps find themselves on the ticket and in need of our support.

I do not limit this evaluation to Huckabee alone. I would love for someone to make Mitt’s case as well, as it is foolish to believe that the entire conservative base is united behind the idea of Mitt for VP, especially in regards to the social conservative wing of the party.

I do not believe in reinventing the wheel. A fairly comprehensive summary of Mike Huckabee’s governing philosophy and positions on the issues was written by Joe Carter, a member of his rapid response on line team during the campaign. I am not sure how significant its impact was at the time, but I would like to reintroduce it to the blogosphere for your consideration.

As with most politicians, some of Mike’s positions have evolved or been refined over time. Some may define this as a ‘flip’ but I challenge you to find a ‘flop.’ Huckabee has never moved back and forth on the same subject multiple times. He has always delievered on his campaign promises and on his word in general. As a result, his supporters feel safe in believing that his current political platform does indeed represent who and what he would be about in the whitehouse, in any capacity.

Please attempt for a few minutes to lay your preconceptions to the side and ‘discover’ Mike Huckabee for the first time again. I am not asking you to decide if he is a ‘conservative’ by whatever definition you may use, but rather, to think about if someone with these governing philosophies would be a conservative influence on a president McCain, and ultimately, if a team of these two individuals is more acceptable than a Barack Obama administration.

The article is lengthy, but well worth the read. Thanks for your time, and please be polite in your commentary, even if you forcefully disagree. Here is the link to the original source:

http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/004182.html

For the past few months I’ve been defending Governor Mike Huckabee against an onslaught of attacks on his character, positions, and record. When I worked for the campaign I spent a significant portion of my time clearing up misconceptions for journalists and parrying dishonest accusations made by other campaigns. And here on this blog I’ve written numerous posts responding to the questions posed by bloggers and rebutting claims made by sundry interest groups.Yet all this time I’ve failed to make a positive case for why I feel Governor Huckabee to be the most visionary and conservative candidate in the race. I naively assumed that everyone was seeing what I was seeing. Indeed, I’m embarrassed to admit that I failed to recognize that not everyone would have the same familiarity with his policy positions as his former Director of Research.

To rectify this situation I’ve compiled a list of his most significant policy positions on a range of issues–from tax reform to national security. While all of this information can be found online, I thought it would be useful to cut away the excess verbiage in order to provide as succinct a set of statements as possible. I’ve also included a prefatory section that explains Governor Huckabee’s philosophy of governance.

Although this compilation is not exhaustive, I do believe that it provides a useful outline for anyone who wants to familiarize themselves on Huckabee’s true positions on the issues.

Philosophy of Governance

Governor Mike Huckabee: “To me conservative governance means following the “original intent” of the Founding Fathers, it means recognizing that Jefferson won the debate with Hamilton, and that we want very strong, energetic, innovative states, with government both as limited as possible and as close to the people as possible. The states should not usurp functions that can be handled locally, and the federal government should not usurp functions that can be handled by the states. An important part of being a conservative President for me would be strengthening federalism. Conservative governance also means an emphasis on personal responsibility and letting the free market function unencumbered, so that Americans have tremendous opportunity, but not a guaranteed outcome. It means smaller, more efficient government; lower government spending; lower taxes. It means keeping the government out of our lives and letting families keep as much of the money they earn and make as many of their own decisions as possible. It means allowing younger workers to have personal Social Security accounts. It means getting entitlements under control.

I believe that our rights come from God, not from our government; that the people should retain as much power and be left alone as much as possible; that the federal government should not do what can be done at the local or state level; that our government belongs to the people, not the lobbyists and special interests; that government at all levels exists to serve the people and not the other way around; that we must respect the separation of powers and no branch should usurp the authority of another; that my greatest responsibility is to protect the American people from all threats; that the free market, low taxes, and minimal regulation are the keys to economic growth and prosperity; that Americans are owed equal opportunity, but not an equal outcome; that we are a culture of life and recognize that each individual has intrinsic value and worth; that we are only as strong as our families; that we owe a huge debt to those who have given their lives for this country to protect the freedoms and way of life for which they sacrificed.

I would weigh all of my decisions in the context of those principles to assure that I am doing the right thing and not the popular or expedient thing. I will always err on the side of protecting life, strengthening our families, and protecting our citizens and our country from possible threats to their safety.”

(Response provided to the American Conservative Union)

Issues and Positions

Tax Reform

-Make all tuition for higher education tax-deductible

-Make health insurance tax deductible for individuals and families as it now is for businesses. (Low income families would get tax credits instead of deductions.)

-Preserve and expand President Bush’s tax cuts

-Eliminate the marriage penalty

-Cut taxes on savings

-Eliminate the Death Tax

-Reduce counterproductively high personal and corporate marginal tax rates.

-Encourage “baby boomers” who plan to work into their late 60’s or even beyond by giving them tax breaks, like additional exemptions or a “working senior” deduction.

-Long-term goal: implementation of the FairTax so that American workers keep their entire paycheck, American businesses can compete on a level-playing field with their foreign competitors, and so that we can brings jobs and investment that are currently parked off-shore back to the United States.

Economy

-Subprime mortgage crisis: begin a second round of negotiations with subprime lenders with an eye toward expansion of the “Hope Now” program.

-Cut burdensome red tape that drives up the cost of products and keeps employers from hiring more workers or raising wages.

-Reduce frivolous lawsuits which drive up costs of products and medical care.

-Institute free trade that is fair to America. We will expect our trading partners to live up to their obligations—everyone must play by fair rules.

-Open new markets for American products.

-Ensure the Federal Reserve adapts a pro-growth, low-inflation policy.

-Veto earmarks and unnecessary discretionary spending

Energy Independence

-Implement a national energy security policy which will end our dependence on Middle Eastern oil within ten years by conserving, exploring, and inventing our way to independence in energy.

-pursue all avenues of alternative energy: nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass.

-Remove red tape that slows innovation, allow the free market to sort out what makes the most sense economically.

-Set aside a federal research and development budget that will be matched by the private sector to seek the best new products in alternative fuels.

Social Issues

-Support passage of a constitutional amendment to protect the right to life.

-Support passage of a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

-Oppose all embryo-destructive research.

-Veto any pro-abortion legislation, including federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

Education

-Make all tuition for higher education tax-deductible

-Support the rights of parents to home school their children

-Support states that want to create more charter schools or implement public school choice.

-Allow states to develop their own benchmarks.

-Work towards a clear distinction between the federal role in assisting and empowering states and in usurping the right of states to carry out the education programs for their students

Healthcare

-Advocate policies that will encourage the private sector to seek innovative ways to bring down costs and improve the free market for health care services.

-Reform medical liability

-Support the adoption of electronic record keeping

-Make health insurance more portable from one job to another

-Expand health savings accounts to include all Americans.

-Making health insurance tax deductible for individuals and families as it now is for businesses. (Low income families would get tax credits instead of deductions.)

-Encourage the states’ role as laboratories for new market-based approaches.

Immigration

-Ensure that an interlocking surveillance camera system is installed along the border by July 1, 2010.

-Ensure that the border fence construction is completed by July 1, 2010.

-Increase the number of border patrol agents.

-Fully support all law enforcement personnel tasked with enforcing immigration law.

-Policies that promote or tolerate amnesty will be rejected.

-Propose to provide all illegal immigrants a 120-day window to register with the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services and leave the country. Those who register and return to their home country will face no penalty if they later apply to immigrate or visit; those who do not return home will be, when caught, barred from future reentry for a period of 10 years.

-This is not a “touchback” provision. Those who leave this country and apply to return from their home country would go to the back of the line.

-Employment is the chief draw for most illegal immigrants and denying them jobs is the centerpiece of an attrition strategy.

-Impose steep fines and penalties on employers that violate the law.

-Institute a universal, mandatory citizenship verification system as part of the normal hiring process.

-Prevent the IRS and the Social Security Administration from accepting fraudulent Social Security numbers or numbers that don’t match the employees’ names.

-Promote better cooperation on enforcement by supporting legislative measures such as the CLEAR Act, which aims to systematize the relationship between local law and federal immigration officials.

-Encourage immigration-law training for police. Local authorities must be provided the tools, training, and funding they need so local police can turn illegal immigrants over to the federal authorities.

-End exemptions for Mexicans and Canadians to the US-VISIT program, which tracks the arrival and departure of foreign visitors. Since these countries account for the vast majority of foreigners coming here (85 percent), such a policy clearly violates Congress’ intent in mandating this check-in/check-out system.

-Reject Mexico’s “matricula consular” card, which functions as an illegal-immigrant identification card.

-Inform foreign governments when their former citizens become naturalized U.S. citizens.

-Impose civil and/or criminal penalties on American citizens who illegitimately use their dual status (e.g., using a foreign passport, voting in elections in both a foreign country and the U.S.).

-Eliminate the visa lottery system and the admission category for adult brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens.

-Increase visas for highly-skilled and highly-educated applicants.

-Expedite processing for those who serve honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces.

-Improve our immigration process so that those patiently and responsibly seeking to come here legally will not have to wait decades to share in the American dream.

Judges

-Huckabee’s judicial philosophy: “I believes that the Constitution must be interpreted according to its original meaning, and flatly reject the notion of a “living Constitution.” The meaning of the Constitution cannot be changed by judicial fiat. The powers delegated to the federal government by the Constitution come from “We the People,” and judges have no right to prohibit the people from passing democratically-enacted laws unless we have explicitly authorized them to do so. Nor can vaguely-worded language in the Constitution be used by judges to give them power over subjects the framers never intended our founding document to address. As such, any interpretation of the Constitution that is based on “evolving standards of decency,” penumbras, or any other judicial fiction, is antithetical to the rule of law, and must be forcefully challenged.”

-Appoint justices and judges who not only share his judicial philosophy (e.g., Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Clarence Thomas, and Justice Samuel Alito), but who also have established themselves within the conservative legal community as faithful adherents of originalism and textualism.

Social Security

-Allow younger workers the option of personal accounts.

-Allow letting people take the money in their account at retirement and buy an annuity.

-Encourage “baby boomers” who plan to work into their late 60’s or even beyond by giving them tax breaks, like additional exemptions or a “working senior” deduction.

-Since some retirees don’t need their Social Security to retire comfortably, offer them the option of a tax-free lump sum for their children or grandchildren to get when they die, which would delay some payments for decades.

National Sovereignty

-Oppose the Law of the Sea Treaty.

-Oppose the U. N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.

-Oppose the North American Union,.

-Oppose the Kyoto Treaty.

Veteran’s Affairs
Veterans will be provided the following “Bill of Rights”:

-The right to a mandatory rather than a discretionary mechanism for funding veterans’ health care, to eliminate year-to-year uncertainty that the funds they need will be there for them

-The right to obtain full and clear explanation of all benefits and comprehensive assistance in obtaining those benefits.

-The right to have a claim processed within six months.

-The right to the fullest possible accounting of the fate of POW/MIAs and the right to be designated as POW/MIA.

-The right to access state-of-the-art treatment facilities for traumatic brain injuries.

-The right of National Guard and Reserve personnel called to active service to receive the same benefits as active duty veterans.

-The right of disabled veterans to receive both their military retirement and VA compensation.

-The right of wounded Reserve troops to be treated like their active duty counterparts until their claims have been processed.

-The right of wounded veterans and those who have served in combat theaters to a comprehensive GI bill that provides full tuition, books, fees, and living expenses at any institution to which the veteran is accepted.

National Security

-Increase defense spending to six percent of GDP.

-Build new planes, new armed vehicles, new robotic land and air vehicles, new ships all right here in America.

-Recruit and train thousands of new troops and bring our National Guard and Reserves back home. We must increase the size of the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps by about 92,000 troops within two to three years without lowering enlistment standards.

-Improve the nation’s aging infrastructure (roads, bridges, water systems, sewer systems, etc.).

-Active-duty forces should not be used for nation building. We must return to our policy of using other government agencies to build schools, hospitals, roads, sewage treatment plants, water filtration systems, electrical facilities, and legal and banking systems.

-If we are required to undertake a large invasion we must use overwhelming force.

-[The GWOT] — The Commander-in-Chief has an obligation to clearly communicate to the American people the nature of the war we are fighting, especially the goal of the jihadists: to kill every last one of us, destroy civilization as we know it, and to establish a theocratic caliphate without national borders.

-[The GWOT] — The United States’ biggest challenge in the Arab and Muslim worlds is the lack of a viable moderate alternative to radicalism. Although we cannot export democracy we should nurture moderate forces that present an alternative to the jihadists.

-[The GWOT] — The goal in the Arab and Muslim worlds will be to calibrate a course between maintaining stability and promoting democracy. We must not act too hastily but we must act. Specifically, we can help by aiding or promoting basic sanitation, health care, education, jobs, a free press, and fair court systems within these areas.

-[The GWOT] — We must reduce our dependence on foreign oil if we are going to defeat jihadism.

-[The GWOT] — We must strengthen both our human intelligence resources and our military assets in order to eliminate the current threat.

-[Iraq] — We should not withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq any faster than General David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander there, recommends. Troops must be brought home based on the conditions on the ground, not on artificial timetables.

-[The Kurds] — We must encourage Turkey to continue to improve life for its Kurds, and we must encourage the Turkish Kurds to address their grievances through the political process, including through the 20 deputies currently representing them in parliament.

-[The Kurds] — We should be willing to provide the Turks with actionable intelligence to go after the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) with limited air strikes and commando raids. A even better method would be to train and equip Iraqi Kurds to fight the PKK and rid themselves of this menace.

-[Iran] — The military option for dealing with Iran should not be taken off the table.

-[Iran] — Iran is a nation that has to be contained, just as the Soviet Union was during the Cold War. In order to contain Iran, it is essential to win in Iraq. We cannot allow Iran to push its theocracy into Iraq and then expand it further west.

-[Iran] — We must be as aggressive diplomatically as we have been militarily since 9/11. We must intensify our diplomatic efforts with China, India, Russia, South Korea, and European states and persuade them to put more economic pressure on Iran.

-[Iran] — Despite the protestations of Congressional Democrats, we should support and continue President Bush’s new sanctions against Iran, his decision to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction, and the classifications of al Quds force as a supporter of terrorism. We must also encourage our state and private pension funds to divest themselves of Iran-related assets.

-[Iran] — Despite the protestations of Russia, we should move forward with the current plan to set up ten missile interceptors in Poland and a radar system in the Czech Republic to protect Europe from Iranian missiles.

-[Iran] — We should reestablish diplomatic relations with Iran but only after the Iranians have made concessions that serve to create a less hostile relationship.

-[Iran] — Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. However, a range of incentives (e.g., trade and economic assistance, full diplomatic relations, and security guarantees) should be offered before moving forward with military action. Before we put our troops at risk in Iran, we should exhaust all diplomatic and economic options.

-[Pakistan] — On September 12, 2001, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf agreed to sever his relationship with the Taliban and let us fight al Qaeda inside Pakistan. But distracted by Iraq, we have since allowed him to go back on his word. We should pressure him to remain firm in his commitment to us.

-[Pakistan] — Because the next attack on the U.S. will have been planned in Pakistan, we must go after al Qaeda’s safe havens in that country. The threat of an attack on us is far graver than the risk that a quick and limited strike against al Qaeda would bring extremists to power in Pakistan.

-[Pakistan] — Musharraf has spent far more energy and enthusiasm sidelining the moderate Pakistani forces (like former Prime Ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif) than he has in going after religious extremists and terrorists. We must have a “Pakistan policy” rather than just a “Musharraf policy.”

-[Pakistan] — We must use our friendly ties with India to encourage and help it improve its relationship with Pakistan and to push for increased trade and cooperation between the two countries, all to bring greater stability to the South Asian region.

If ever there was evidence needed to prove that the GOP finds itself in a place where its message lacks resonance with with the American voting public, it was provided by the stunning special election upsets that have taken place in recent weeks in traditionally Republican strongholds. The Republican losses appear to be a disturbing precursor of things to come.

These losses set the House and Senate Republicans atwitter as they came to realize that there was no longer any seat that could be considered a ’safe seat,’ and started the main stream liberal media buzzing happily about the coming Democratic apocalypse.

What no one seems to be talking about however, is HOW the dems are winning in these GOP strongholds. They are doing it by running as far to the right as they can, without actually being a Repubican conservative. If this trend continues, and if elected officials actually follow through on the platforms on which they run, a Democratic ‘majority’ may not be the liberal nightmare we see coming down the pike after all. That caucus may in fact be a party potentially divided against itself, with senators and congressmen ripe for crossover picking.

This does not mean that Republicans shouldn’t fight agressively to retain or win seats in the fall. It does mean, however, that Americans in general may not suffer as much ‘damage’ as they might, if a Democratic majority in congress was more liberal than conservative.

The congressional Blue Dogs are increasing in numbers, and continue to flex their clout, (as they have demonstrated already at least once this session, see link beow)

http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=90894

Their presence in congress, along with that of Republicans who have rediscovered their conservative roots, may be enough to stymie much of the liberal tax and spend agenda that the Pelosi coalition might try to push through.

On a recent MSNBC Sunday morning round table analysis, Harold Ford Jr. (D) observed that there was a ‘lesson to be learned’ by Democrats from the southern special election upsets. “Democrats cannot run liberal campaigns” he said. Republican panelists in on the discussion, including former presidential candidate governor Mike Huckabee, pointed out the dangers that would be inherant in running against conservative Democrats, including the possible backlash caused by attempting to smear them generically as ‘liberal’ if they are known within the community as being pro-life, pro-gun and otherwise ‘conservative’ by the layman’s standards. Republicans are going to have to run as conservatives, and not ‘against ‘liberals’ if they want to be successful.

The one good thing about the leftist extremism being discovered this primary cycle, scary as it is,..is that it is forcing the true Democratic base to find their moderate center identity again. More and more on pro Hillary blogs, I’m seeing Barack Obama labled Marxist/Socialist. Many who were swept up in Move On sympathy for Bill, have realized just how far left of center their party has veered, and are determined to win it back; even if that means electing John McCain.

As events unfolded this primary season, it became more and more obvious, to me at least, that the survival of the right, seems tied to its ability to be the dominant partner of the ‘conservative Middle’. This is why John McCain and Mike Huckabee with their almost populist appeal, were the last men standing on the right. The great irony of Obama’s campaign, is that he’s running as the great unifier, when every indication is that his idea of unity, is everybody taking two steps to the left. Not going to happen.

But the people do want change…so where does that leave us? I’m going to make a stretch and argue that McCain/Moderate conservative VP is going to hold the whitehouse, because Obama will not be able to find his way to the center again if the opposition research and 527s have their way. But I think the dems are going to crush the GOP in the congressional races.

Watch for the make up of the majority though. The Democrats if they are smart, will run Blue Dogs in conservative districts, and they may be our ace in the hole on the really big bills. (I hope!)

If a ‘moderate’ president McCain has a largely ‘moderate’ congress to work with, it is to be hoped that ‘moderately more’ progress can be made in Washington that we have seen in recent years.

Maybe the Next Right… is the Middle.

His Handmaiden

Let me begin this post with a caveat.

I know.

I know that there are some Republicans who do not like Mike Huckabee. Whatever negative first, or in some cases second impression sank in, just can’t seem to be shaken. We’ve all read the rants, been pointed towards the ‘proof’ of corruption, cringed at the foot in mouth moments and grumbled at the ‘lack of experience’.. but there is one thing that cannot be denied. Huckabee connects… and the numbers tell a story that could make the GOP walloping supposedly coming down the line in November, not quite the disaster it might appear to be, IF Huckabee is on McCain’s ticket.

In the weeks and months since McCain ‘clinched’ the nomination of the GOP, a very telling trend has developed in the blogosphere and on the national scene; Huckabee has been able to hold onto his base without trying. They have managed to conduct a very effective grassroots operation to elevate his national profile, in a demonstration of the workhorse ethic that Mccain needs in his campaign if he is to have a prayer of getting the numbers out to vote that could compete with Obama.

In every primary in which Huckabee has been present on the ballot since the suspension of his campaign, he has secured ten percent or higher of the vote. As I write this he is on track for a second place finish on a loaded Kentucky ballot with 8 percent of the vote in the bag..

In every, yes, EVERY internet VP poll posted since the veepstakes have started in earnest, Huckabee supporters have mobilized to demonstrate their loyalty and support for their candidate, producing winning results, even on polls that were posted by hosts that clearly expected significantly different outcomes.

While this fact might be irritating to supporters of other individuals for the veep spot, it again speaks to the heart and commitment of Huckabee supporters who simply refuse to let him step away from the playing field. McCain needs that kind of fire and drive if he hopes to pull out the surprise win.

Huckabee supporters will treck through dark country roads in rural Georgia at two in the morning to plant Mccain/Huckabee signs, just as they did for Huckabee in every state that he won in the South on that surprise Super Tuesday. They will string together an underground railroad of trucks and vans shuttling signs and campaign parphanalia from one state to another, working on a shoestring budget with homegrown networks to tap into the base that brought GWB his win in 2004.

McCain cannot even begin to imagine the manpower and passion he would be plugged into overnight with Huckabee on the ticket.

But let us play devil’s advocate and say that Huckabee’s primary votes are an amalgamation of protest votes, and that his on line vp poll dominace could be the unscientific work of a few political junkies sitting around finding ways to play with the numbers and mess with outcomes. What further proof do we have that Huckabee could bring any realistic hope of success to the McCain ticket?

In two separate Suvey USA polls (sources below) conducted in the critically important swing states of New Mexico and Pennsylvania, and released on May 20th, the McCain/Huckabee ticket, along with several other McCain/VP tickets was pitted head to head against multiple variations of an Obama/VP ticket.

In EVERY matchup, even in the ones where McCain/Huckabee lost to Obama, the McCain/Huckabee ticket polled the strongest of all of the GOP tickets.

Of particular interest, given the recent Obama endorsement by Edwards, was the narrow margin that Obama/Edwards enjoyed in a race against McCain/Huckabee in New Mexico at 47/44  percent respectively. Where is the expected blowout?

When Obama is paired with a democrat VP with lower national name recognition, the odds get even better for the McCain/Huckabee ticket.

In New Mexico again, McCain/Huckabee trounces Obama/Rendell 48/36,  and Obama/Hagle, 50/33 !!

Could this be an indicator that Hillary’s hispanic votes could be up for grabs in the southwest?

Granted, no one knows how high these democrats are on the list of possible veep picks, but the trend seems to indicate that Huckabee only strengthens McCain’s appeal against a ‘diluted’ Obama team in that particular geography and demographic.

Even in a blue state like Pennsylvania, not expected to vote GOP in the general, the McCain/Huckabee GOP ticket fares best against multiple Obama/VP combinations.  McCain/Huckabee actually DEFEATS Obama/Hagle 42/40, and keeps things competitive against Obama/Rendell at 40/47. Even with John Edwards on the democrat ticket, McCain/Huckabee is able to keep the demcrats to within 10 percentage points, and that is before any campaigning has taken place to woo Hillary’s rustbelt support.

This is not to say that other GOP cadidates for VP were creamed by Huckabee’s numbers, in fact most other tickets, including those of Romney, Pawlenty and Lieberman polled within 3-5 percent of Huckabee’s numbers in most match ups, but Huckabee undeniably enters the contest with the deepest ready made base. The reality is though, that in this particular election, one percentage point could be the difference between winning and losing.

So my question for McCaniacs, and Republicans in general becomes, DO YOU WANT A CHANCE AT WINNING? Because if you do, the cold hard numbers say that your best chance..so far… is with Mike Huckabee on that ticket.

My argument to those who believe, (in my opinion incorrectly) that the GOP could win, but conservatism would lose with that ticket, is this.  If it helps to think of them as placeholders until a ‘true’ conservative gets back on the throne, so be it. Just realize that if we open the doors to a democratic presidency right now, it may well be a decade or more until another conservative sees the door of the white house.

The voting public has been so burned by the GOP brand by this point, that they will probaly be willing to overlook a horrible democratic first term, laying the blame for a lack of success at the door of the party who ruled for the last decade.

If McCain/Huckabee can buy conservatives four more years to start the turnaround, then 2012 will bring a less toxic environment in which Mitt, Jindal, Huckabee and anybody else who wants to throw their hat into the ring, can make their case for the direction in which the conservative movement and the country, should move.

These poll numbers reveal that Obama is beatable..especially if we work hard to pick up Hillary’s conservative democrats in the big swing states where she creamed him. The reality is however, beating him will be harder if we’re not all playing for the same team. And that’s not fearmongering..it’s cold, hard, fact.

Just something to think about.

His Handmaiden

Sources:

Pennsylvania: http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=162d4baa-59af-4ec5-9d9b-eb6e658e86c5

New Mexico: http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=bc4b7825-1ea9-4cf6-be2e-bbeb0f7c2d5f

The McCain/Huckabee brand: http://donklephant.com/2008/05/19/the-mccain-huckabee-brand/

There’s some ‘baggage’ that comes with being a Christian and believing in the exisitence of God and goodness. By default, most believers have to acknowlege the existence of the devil and evil.

For those of us who grew up in the pentecostal, charismatic and even catholic traditions, our exposure to the manifestations of evil in this world are perhaps a little higher than for those in more conservative christian traditions. Almost all of us however, acknowlege that witchcraft, hexes, curses and demonic oppression and possession are not only possible, but are actually a part of the spiritual reality of our world.

This is why I read with absolute horror, and righteous anger, that the anti-war protest group Code Pink, had ended their latest week of protests, with an open invitation to witches to to cast spells on the location and occupants of a recruiting center in California. I believe they are planning another session for Mother’s day.

Code Pink members unfurled a pink banner reading “Troops Home Now” and waved signs as they began the protest, which they promised would include incantations and pointy hats for a “witches, crones and sirens” day.

“Women are coming to cast spells and do rituals and to impart wisdom to figure out how we’re going to end war,” Zanne Sam Joi of Bay Area Code Pink told FOXNews.com.

The attitude of many, including some in my own family, was to laugh at their ‘antics.’ Their concept of witches is limited to the halloween hag or fairy tale bad guy, or the hot babes of ‘Charmed.’ Few, very few recognize the spiritual implications of having a ‘real’ witch speaking a curse into the lives of unsuspecting indivduals.

If you don’t ‘believe’ in poison, and you drink it..it will still kill you. Not believing in the power of evil to destroy a life, won’t stop it from happening.

My dismay hightened when I discovered that the only reponse to this spiritual assault was people putting a ‘ring of salt’ around the recruiting center.

May God help us…

Where were the believers to plead the protection of the blood of Jesus for those who were present.. where were the spiritual warriors who could speak the Word into the atmosphere and command angels to war against the forces of darkness that would show up to carry out a witches decree?

I know I’m probably freaking people out writing like this… but I come from a spiritual tradition that teaches us to recognize our spiritual authority. We are nothing in ourselves, but the authority of Christ that dwells in us as believers has given us the right to bind and loose things in the realm of the spirit that would seek to harm those covered by our sphere of influence.

I cannot put into words the intensity of my concern when it is considered acceptable in America, to openly dabble in witchcraft in an effort to influence the direction of government policy. Is there no shame anymore… is paganism now the currency of the day?

I know there are those who will say that this was a harmless exercise in pagentry.. like Halloween in May. That may have been the case for the vast majority. But I guarantee you..absolutely…that some who turned up were active practitioners of witchcraft, and used the activity of the ‘themed’ protest to do real spiritual damage. A reporter familiar with the area observed:

Code Pink’s request to have witches join the anti-war protest in Berkeley is probably tongue-in cheek. But I lived in Berkeley for many years, and I know for a fact, that there are covens in that fair city. I wouldn’t be surprised if a few real witches show up and conjure some anti-war magic.

Saints.. these are dark days. Evil in all it’s forms is lurking in the weeds, waiting for the structures to be be put in place for it to come out into the open and be accepted as the norm.

I hesitate to label individuals as evil.. but I can certainly identify the ideologies that would foster its presence. The extreme libralism of ‘any thing goes’ and ‘there is no such thing as right and wrong’; the era of ‘reletavism’ that would be ushered in to our lives if this philosphy is allowed to be the dominant shaping force on our domestic and foreign policy, will only bring catostrophic regression of the value system that has made America what it is.

There is much more at stake in this election than a ‘presidential nomination.’ We are on the frontlines of a battle for the spiritual and cultural identity of this nation. And you’d better believe, if the liberals win.. I’m heading back to the islands.

God be with us.

His Handmaiden

References:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354689,00.html

http://newsblaze.com/story/20080510090143reye.nb/newsblaze/TOPSTORY/Top-Stories.html

First of all, my apologies to any regular readers for my absence this last week or so.

I’ve been so busy with work, and the news is so saturated with democratic primary sensationalism, that there just hasn’t been much I actually wanted to process out in the open.

The Matrix called, and I lost myself in that wonderful place where you barely even remember there’s an electoral process going on. (I’m telling you, McCain needs to do something soon to wake up and engage the base, or we might all just slip into a coma and wake up after the electiion!)

The restful bliss of ignorace notwithstanding…hearing Michelle Obama say at a rally on CSPAN, that a child in South Carolina burst into tears at the thought of Obama becomming president because she ‘got’ that America was putting limitations on her, woke me up right quick from my lethargy.

If Michelle is to be believed, the little girl cried because she ‘knew’ that she wasn’t getting an education equal to others, she ‘knew’ that she won’t get good health care if she had an emergency, she ‘knew’ that we were stuck pursuing a failing foreign policy.. because she ‘knew’ that America is putting limitations on her ability to succeed.. WHAT??!!

I think she cried because it was exciting that she might get to see the first black president elected in our history… but that wouldn’t offer enough political capital to manipulate on the stump.

I had an ear out checking to see if anyone in talk radio discovered the soundbite to add to her ‘I’ve never really been proud of America’ comment, but no one seems to have commented on it on radio or in the blogosphere that I can see.

I actually sense that even the live crowd didn’t appreciate the comment, because she was clerly expecting applause or feedback when she said it, and when it didn’t come, she backpeddled on the comment and tried to qualify what she ment by ‘limitations’

Say what you will… NO ONE can doubt that America is still the land of opportunity. You could be born in the most terrible of circumstances, but most Americans, if given access to an education, food, and shelter, can become whatever they want to become.

The Only limitations we have are those we place on ourselves.

The victim mentality seems to overshadow almost everything the Obamas do. In fact, much of their success seems to be derived from getting people to feel really sorry for themselves, getting people to feel indignant at their lot in life, and then getting them to take it out on ‘other,’ (whoever that happens to be at the time.)

Sound familiar? Welcome to the ‘black’ experience as defined by Liberation ideology.

Oddly enough, this is all done in the name of unity, love and change.  The messages seem to be at crosspurposes.

I know that all of the candidates repeat the ‘Washington is broken’ mantra, and they’re right! It just seems that Barak’s campaign seems to get more propulsion out of that message because of the almost ‘revolutionary’  way he manages to communicate it.

So much of their message seems to be ‘Fight the power!!” that it makes me wonder again, to what extent Rev. Wright’s philosophical perspective has influenced and informed Obama’s perspective of the world, and how he thinks it can be ‘fixed’

If you understand that according to Wright’s world view, only RADICAL action can bring change, and that Wright needs the ‘oppressors’ to stay the ‘oppressors’ so that he can hold on to power over his congregation of victims, it makes you wonder how much ‘Change’ Obama would really be interested in making from the WH, and just how radical those changes would be if he actually made them.

In theory, following Wright’s philosophical model,  Obama would hold the reins of power, ‘preach’ to his victims that he is fighting for them, while he does little or nothing that would actually improve their lot.. and in fact could do some radical things that would in fact make their situation worse…because in the end, it was only ever about the power.

This would sound crazy, except for the closed door conversations caught on tape, or the back channel discusssions about NAFTA with the Canadians, or the latest doublespeak on his dealings with the teamsters.

I don’t hate Obama.. in fact, for his supporters sakes I hope his ‘revolution’ is real, and based on a sincere desire to help people and change America for the better, but much has come to light that makes one seriously question the motivations of this ‘rebel’

If we have learned anything, it is that Obama’s brand has taken a hit… Is he really just another politician capable of doing and saying what needs to be done to ensure his progress?

If so, It’s just sad that the only way he can find to raise himself up… is by making us feel really down so that he can offer us ’salvation’ from our despair.

I am not a victim.

His Handmaiden

I’ve always liked chess.

Can’t say I ever totally mastered it, but I do know that it’s a battle of minds and wills and strategies, and that it doesn’t REALLY get going until some disposable pawns are taken out like so much cannon fodder.

I believe that many online political activists have been reduced to pawns; manipulated, sacrificed, and used to further the agenda of some knights, bishops, kings and queens in the MSM and major league blogosphere.

I’m not a Romney fan… but how did my personal uneasiness about his recent social conservative conversion, become a full blown case of Romney derangement syndrome? I mean, at it’s height I was practically frothing at the mouth in my passionate ‘hatred’ for the man.

I see the same thing from the other side about Mike Huckabee. Sometimes it seems like Romney supporters would love the opportunity to make Mike in effigy and burn him at the stake. The intensity of vitriol is potent, but I doubt at the beginning of January most of them even knew who Huckabee was.

So, the question becomes,  how did we the party faithful end up where we are; full of this unneccessary poison that may end up tainting our ability to reason clearly come November?

The answer I believe, is that we were played as pawns by the conservative and mainstream media and blogosphere both, in their attempts to influence this electoral process in the direction they saw fit.

Lets begin in Iowa … with the unexpected boom in earned media coverage of Huckabee.

The MSM’s experiment with the ‘preacher who would be president’ went through a roller coaster of agendas.

 First he was covered for electoral ‘entertainment,’ not taken at all seriously and not allowed into the hallowed atmosphere of the 1st tier. But Mike is a skilled communicator, and used those apearances to drive up his name recognition and poll numbers, right before the critical first in the nation primary, making him a threat to the then front runner Romney.

This is the critical point at which the general voting public becomes aware of Huckabee and begin to tune in to information about the dark horse candidate.

It is also the first time that many voters become aware that Mitt was running well in Iowa and that there was a contest going on between the two men.

It became the point when the chess masters started manouvring their pawns to get their favorites into a position for checkmate.

The conservative media were already in mid Rudy/Fred propoganda strategy when it became clear that these two would not be players in Iowa, and of the two remaining players, Mitt was clearly more ‘presidential’ in their eyes.

Thus began weeks of intensive interrogation interviews on Fox and the sunday shows, as ’scandal after scandal’ and contorversy were dug up and ’analyzed’ in a constant news cycle in attempts to take the shine off Huckabee’s appeal. Many of the far right giants in the poIitical blogosphere followed suit. Sometimes they even broke the ‘latest scandal’ and fed it into the MSM.

It didn’t help that in the chase for a scoop, reporters cherry picked questions and statements made by both candidates and blew them into days worth of ‘negative’ coverage further inflaming the partisans on both sides of the divide… the now infamous Mormon question by Mike, or the marching with Martin Luther King Jr. comments from Mitt. These were probably not the best comments to make when your every word is going to be dissected, but the damage they did was mainly because of the spin put on the comments by ‘commentators’ and not the comments themselves.

Now, in the minds of Romney supporters Huckabee was a soft on crime, pro-life liberal, knuckle dragging corrupt, bigoted, bible thimping hick. And in the minds of Huckabee supporters, Mitt was a slick opportunist, an empty suit, an elitist  who would say or do anything to get elected.

This maybe wouldn’t have been an unsurmountable problem if the two candidates were covered equally by the one set of commentators that REALLY mattered to the conservative voting public.. but they weren’t.

Because of the clear and OBVIOUS bias of the Hannity’s Ingrams and Malkins against the Huckabee candidacy, Huckabee supporters became livid with the unfair and unbalanced coverage of their candidate in favor of  Romney.

We had no problem with Mike being held accountable for the ’squishy’ areas of his record, but when the conservative media refused to ‘analyze’ the squishiness in Romney’s record, and in effect whitewashed him into Reagan reincarnated, it was very hard to swallow.

Unfortunately, I believe that the steaming frustration we had with the conservative leaders we had trusted to be objective, became directed, unfairly or not, on the object of their affection. Romney.

I began to destest him because he was in my opinion, receiving unfair and perhaps undeserved support from the very people who were doing evrything in their power to negate the candidacy of someone who was a reflection of what mattered most to ME.

It really didn’t help when supporters of both candidates themselves began to spout the media talking points in blog comments, and even went beyond ‘facts’ to the visceral personal character attacks in those comments. I began to percieve Romney’s character as being  the same as the ‘worst’ of his supporters own, and ‘hated’ him even more. I am probably not too far off the mark to say that Romney supporters probably had a visceral reaction to the more extreme presonal attacks on Romney that some Huckabee supporters made as well, and likewise made the leap to attributing those qualities to Mike.

By being unfair in their coverage, the conservative media shot themselves in the foot. They managed to alienate the very voters that they were trying to convince to buy what Mitt was selling. A better strategy would have been to say, Huckabee is good.. but Mitt is better..

Saying Huckabee was a liberal was like telling me and others like me, that I was a liberal too…  “voting bloc overboard!” Not the best way to woo us. It instead created a vicious circle of poisonous dislike that began with the media, but was continued and perpetuated by inflamed supporters.

While the Huckabee supporters waged their war with the conservative media elite, the MSM was still playing with their new ‘preacher Huckabee’ toy, enjoying that it was bothering the GOP elite that they were playing with a ‘pastor,’ and that their apparently unwarranted attention was driving the Romney supporters crazy in their own rights.

In the end, nobody realized that the only winners were the ‘media’ in all its forms, and that the only losers were we the people who cared enough to be actually engage in the political process in action.

Almost all of our ‘frenzy’ is rooted in published and broadcasted material that is written with the intent of being provocative and stirring up hostility between camps. We moved beyond calm and logical opposition on principle, to rabid rival steet gangs, each intent on the destruction of the other.

There are always those extreme, (and immature) characters who will detest and reject a candidate out of hand because of something as personal as their religion.. (on both sides of the divide) But by and large, most of us are just very impressionable, and inclined to believe whatever ‘fits’ with our personal take on a particular issue. If you were inclined to like Mitt, you were more likely to believe and embrace information that reduced Huck’s viability, and vice versa.

Nothing gives these writers and reporters more validation than having 300 comments of Huckabee vs. Romney hysteria posted after their articles. Some bloggers will go so far as to create provocative websites, and then blog about them in a way that provokes controversy.

(I will not go so far as to accuse, but I find it highly suspicious that the huckabee4america.com website was created the same day that it was blogged about on Townhall, in a way designed to inflame Romney supporters against Huck. Further, a google search of the website yeilded only 2 hits, the website and the townhall article. Now, that TH article is being cited as a source by other pro-Romney bloggers in an anti-Huck light.)

Then there is the most recent commentary on Mike’s campaign spin with McCain in Arkansas.

Reported objectively in multiple sources, you come away with a sense that Huckabee and McCain are good friends able to campaign together comfortably because they had a civil campaign.

The exact same conversation reported with an agenda, included the comment, “In a dig at Romney…”

Excuse me.. is that reporter psychic? Can she read minds… how dare she assume that a comment about ‘negative campaigning’ had to be about Romney… did not Fred play dirty, and perhaps hurt Mike even worse that Mitt ever did in SC?

People are playing with our heads… and we’re letting them!

Look, we all have to get to the point where we can say I like my guy more than your guy… but I don’t hate your guy, and I could see some benifits that he could bring to the table.

Neither of these candidates were angels… they are human, and politicians after all. We need to take them down off of their pedestals and accept them for the flawed representatives of our world views that they are.

I’m so tired of being the entertainment or validation pawn for ‘reporters’ or bloggers trying to make their mark on the world with unprofessional provocation.

I’m just not going to play anymore. 

His Handmaiden