Candidates back abstinence

At least two presidential candidates are speaking up for the 83% of Americans who back abstinence education in schools . . . Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback.

(details here)

cross-posted at WisdomIsVindicated

From the "Who determines the tiers?" Dept.

David Brody poses the question "Should Mike Huckabee be in the Top Tier?", a question that appears many journalists are answering in the affirmative:
USA Today:'Coming on Strong'
CNBC Chief Correspondent:Huckabee 'Best Communicator On Stage'
Right Wing News: 'Again, Huckabee Best Overall'
Political Derby: Huckabee 'Capable of Cracking Big Three'
. . .

NRO's Byron York: Huckabee Performance Top Tier

. . . .

MSNBC: 'Huckabee Moves Into First Tier'
Human Events: 'Huckabee Graduates'
New Republic:Huckabee 'Best Performer'
Powerline: 'Huckabee Distinguished Himself'

Michael Steele, GOPAC Chairman: 'Huckabee Moved to Top Tier Tonight'"

Most links via Mike Huckabee President 2008.

cross-posted at WisdomisVindicated

Klein: Huckabee clearing the second tier . . .

I generally concur with Joe Klein's close-in assessment of the first two GOP debates. ("How Rudy Won the Second Debate" | TIME). I say "close-in assessment" because I think he is wrong in asserting, for example, that referencing Reagan makes a candidate (particularly a GOP candidate) seem "old." I also think in a primary debate "winning" is relative.

Here is the money paragraph from the article:

"As for the others, let's clear the stage. There are three pairs of also-rans. Tommy Thompson and Jim Gilmore were fine Governors, but they have nothing to add here. Both of the right-wing populists, Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter, seem obscure and insubstantial, a classic problem for House members running for President; neither is as compelling as Pat Buchanan, who has played this role in the past. I've been surprised by how ineffective Tancredo has been in making his anti-immigrant pitch, which should have some resonance in the Republican Party. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee seems to be winning the battle of the religious conservatives against Kansas Senator Sam Brownback. Huckabee is colorful and funny. In the second debate, he drew whoops from the audience when he said the (Republican) Congress has 'spent money like John Edwards in a beauty shop.' Brownback appears bland, by comparison, young and not very authoritative, a Senator who seems like a member of the House. Of these six, Huckabee seems most likely to survive."

cross-posted at wisdomisvindicated

The humorless Brit at NRO

I've always read the writings of John Derbyshire at arm's length . . . for different reasons his opinions don't quite resonate with me. Maybe because his views are coming from a different culture (he is a naturalized American from Britain, as best I recall); maybe because he is curmudgeonly (not that I don't like other curmudgeons' work, but he seems to say more than most that I have to just grin and bear--or ignore).

Anyway, I like much of what JD says in this bulleted stream-of-conscious column about last night's debate, ("Governor Huckabee, You're No Ann Coulter" -- National Review Online), but I have to disagree that Mike Huckabee's quip about a spendthrift John Edwards at a beauty shop is mean-spirited or anything approaching it . . . it was a joke for heaven's sake, and a $400 hair cut is certainly deserving of scoffery. Lighten up, Francis.

cross-posted at wisdomisvindicated.

Huckabee's self-deprecating humor

One other great line from the debate (from Mike Huckabee) was his response to Jim Gilmore's dig on taxes. ("GOP Candidates Go for the Jugular in Feisty Primary Debate") Gilmore (apparently) coined the term Rudy McRomney as a way of dismissing the top-tier of candidates, and when asked by Chris Wallace to make his case that Rudy, Mitt and John aren't sufficiently Conservative, Gilmore said Huckabee had raised taxes. Huckabee responded (aside from a substantive defense of his support of a tax increase devoted to "infrastructure"):

"'It's a form of flattery to be attacked but I wish my name would get in the moniker. ... I could use the bump,' Huckabee said, adding that he doesn't apologize for getting 94 tax decreases while being a Republican governor in a Democratic state, even though he raised gasoline taxes in his state."

Cross-posted on wisdomisvindicated

Shared sacrifice in time of war

Mike Huckabee's comments in response to an annoying line of hypothetical questions about actions the candidates would take as President in the wake of a terrorist attack. Huckabee said that during time of war Americans should be urged to sacrifice. His comments are early in this segment.

I am sympathetic to arguments for all-volunteer armed services, but I believe mandatory public service would be splendid. I also think it is a President's challenge to make sure that the cost of war is felt/shared as broadly as possible by the country's voters.

Kudos to Wallace, Goler and Hume

You have to hand it to Chris Wallace, Wendell Goler and Brit Hume for not busting a gut on Mike Huckabee's line about John Edwards during the debate this evening (i.e., "the current Congress is spending money like John Edwards in a beauty shop").

cross-posted at wisdomisvindicated

Liberals kind of sort of like Huckabee

From the left-handed-compliment department, there's an op/ed in today's Des Moines Register (here) about the '08 race with this reference to Mike Huckabee:

"Which is why this column's vote for the most intriguing Republican candidate nobody's heard of goes to ... Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas."

I disagree with a number of the author's conclusions (e.g., he says Al Gore is the most qualified potential Dem candidate), but his perspective seems to demonstrate Huckabee's appeal with so-called "moderates" and some Liberals.

cross-posted in wisdomisvindicated

Hobbs on Thompson and Social Conservatives

Bill Hobbs has posted (here) about an Washington Times article ("Christian conservatives pledge support for '08 Thompson bid") and--based on the anonymous assurances of several "Christian Conservatives," he concludes:

"This is bad news for a number of social-conservative Republicans in the GOP field, especially Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee."

I'm curious as to why they're being secretive, and I think that this story doesn't warrant Bill's conclusion. I noted as I read the article that it inaccurately stated, "Mr. Thompson, whose celebrity is based on his television and movie acting roles as well as his tenure as a senator from Tennessee, has consistently opposed abortion rights, but until recently had backed campaign-finance laws unpopular with advocacy groups on both the right and left." I know that Bill harbors no doubt that Thompson's pro-choice statements/stances from way back in the 90s are insignificant, but not all of us are as convinced (e.g., here and here).

Cross-posted on wisdomisvindicated

Of pro-life ephiphanies

This NH article, focusing on neighboring-ex-governor Romney raises a good point about a given candidate's ability to woo voters. Changing one's mind on an issue is certainly understandable, but I think it's fair (not to mention wise) to look beyond a candidate's rhetoric.

Pro-life leaders divided on Romney: "Five New Hampshire pro-life leaders split in their opinion on the sincerity of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's abortion epiphany.

. . . .

Karen Testerman, president of the pro-life Cornerstone Policy Research group, said of Romney, "Everybody has an ability to change their opinions because they get more information. But there is some flawed logic when he says he is against embryonic stem cell research but yet is willing to support abortions for cases of rape and incest. Why is a life at seven days more precious than a life at 14 or 20 weeks?"

Testerman said that McCain "has a good voting record," but she said he does not excite pro-life activists, and overall, "He doesn't seem to be getting the spark, based on the event attendance I've seen."

She named Brownback and Huckabee as "100 percent" pro-life."

Fred Thompson is likely to face these same questions. Intellectual integrity or consistency bolsters a person's credibility in my opinion. Too many candidates try to finesse a controversial issue--too often it works when they're merely hoping to appear resolute and principled and serious.

Cross-posted at wisdomisvindicated.blogspot.com

Red meat for the GOP faithful?

Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, which advocates the teaching of evolution in schools, said the candidates, given their positions on other issues, were undoubtedly sincere but were nevertheless appealing to a fundamentalist wing of their party.

“Nine Republican state parties have taken anti-evolutionist positions,” Ms. Scott said. “They want to throw the far right a little red meat, and creationism serves nicely.”

cross-posted at wisdomisvindicated.blogspot.com

Creationists not alone -- Concord (NH) Monitor

This is an interesting article on the whole Darwinism debate from the debate last week. I was somewhat out of pocket all week, so I wasn't able to post, but I did notice a lot of buzz about the Evolution question in the GOP '08 debate.

First, I have to say that I resent that this question may have been handled differently than the others. From what I've heard, it was presented like a question at a defensive driving course or a museum tour--since when do you have candidates for the most powerful job in the World (I acknowledge this rhetorical question loses some of its punch when Dennis Kucinich is factored in) respond to a question by raising their hand?

Second, while I think it was intended (based on the context and the format) to be a "gotcha" question, it merely helped all the secularist, hardcore Democrats to discern which candidate they really, really would never vote for.

I've been amused to observe the condescension and arrogance (and out-of-touch-ness) of those who've attempted to vilify and/or ridicule the three candidates who dared to answer differently than Dem leadership or the MSM faithful. As this story from the Washington Post shows, these candidates are not alone, and certainly not in the minority. "Eager to Be Reagan's Heir, but Not Bonzo's Cousin." The writers certainly understated the facts when they said, " . . . a look at public polling on the issue reveals that the three men aren't far from the mainstream in that belief." I wonder how they would define "mainstream" when--as they reported in the article, a 2004 ABC poll found that 61% of respondents viewed the Genesis account of creation as "literally true."

The Concord Monitor reprinted an excerpt of the article under the fitting title "Creationists are not alone"--indeed.

Cross-posted at wisdomisvindicated.blogspot.com