Muddling Toward Maturity Blog

RICK PERRY - MICHELLE MALKIN GIVES REASONS TO PROCEED WITH CAUTION

I would like to share the enthusiasm ginning up among Rick Perry supporters, but Michelle Malkin's post gives pause.  Her critique raises a red flag.   Malkin writes:

My syndicated column today dissects Perry’s recent, so-called “walk backs” of his odious Gardasil vaccine mandate for children. I’ve written and reported on vaccine bullies in the schools and on informed parental authority over vaccines previously. But as you’ll see from my column below, Perry defenders who dismiss critics as “single-issue” activists are willfully blind to the Gardasil disgrace’s multiple layers of rottenness. Related must-reads on Perry and Gardasil: Tom Bevan, Rhymes with Right, and BA Cyclone at RedState. (See also this flashback on Hillary, Merck money, and Gardasil.)

While Perry and his campaign staff have now paid lip service to making a “mistake” in shoving the executive order down families’ throats, they remain defiant in defending the decree and Perry’s zealous, big government overreaching. From the latest story on Perry’s “reversal” in the Washington Post: “Perry campaign spokesman Mark Miner dismissed the criticism. Governor Perry has always stood on the side of protecting life, and that is what this issue was about…”

Oh, no it wasn’t. Please read this, get informed, pass it on, and make sure that you don’t fall for a purported cure to our political ills that’s worse than the power-grabbing disease in the current White House.

HOUSE GOP BUDGET PROPOSES DOING AWAY WITH LIBERAL GIVEAWAYS

From the Family Research Council:  (I say "hooray" to these proposed budget cuts and hope they pass.)  Update note: I need to clarify.  The post below refers to a budget to temporarily fund the federal government, commonly known as a "continuing resolution" (CR). 

If there's anyone who doesn't feel the love this Valentine's Day, it's the organizations on the Left. Late Friday, House leaders came back to the table with a second budget--and to the disappointment of most liberal groups, it hit the $100 billion bulls-eye. The casualties of these latest cuts happen to be some of the Democrats' biggest allies: the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (PBS and NPR), the Corporation for National Service (Americorps), Legal Services Corporation, Title X "Family Planning" programs (Planned Parenthood), and others. After some frank conversations, House leaders took the advice of Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and FRC to hack away as much as possible in this first go-round of the continuing resolution (CR). For years, the liberal political establishment has treated the government like an ATM, withdrawing hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for causes that Washington has no business funding. Most Americans have no idea that this symbiotic relationship between liberal politicians and organizations exists. Yet year after year, Democrats funnel our money to their friends, who in turn, help keep those leaders in power.

GOV. MITCH DANIELS OF INDIANA DELIVERS A BRILLIANT, MASTERFUL, CHURCHILLIAN SPEECH AT CPAC

Kathryn Jean Lopez declared Gov. Daniel's speech  "a cut above anything heard at CPAC yet."  That caught my attention, so I read the speech, and found it so excellent I chose to describe it in the headline above as  "Churchillian."  It is well worth reading (text below).  If you have the time, watch the video.  [Update: video provided on this post if you click "continue reading" below] If  you do nothing else, watch George Will's seven-minute introduction.  His  succinct, witty yet weighty comments entertain even as they illumine.

Gov. Daniel's speech:

REMEMBERING PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN

Today is the 100th birthday of Ronald Reagan.  Alan Sears describes the time and the man well:

Time gets away from all of us, and it’s hard, sometimes, to remember what a pall lay over the United States 30 years ago. The economy was in near ruins. Our enemies abroad had been emboldened to increasing aggressions by the passive “tsk-tsk-tsks” of a president who chided his own people for their moral “malaise.” Even amid celebrations of its 200^th year of liberty, the country seemed downcast and disenchanted at the prospects of a bleak and listless future.

Then he walked in.

“It’s morning in America,” he said, with a smile like the rising of the sun.  He embraced his nation and its destiny, unfazed by the waning economic indicators and the rattling sabers of Communist armies and insurgents around the globe.  He exuded joy and hope and confidence … and looking on themselves through his warm gaze, Americans began to share his belief that this nation’s best years might still lie ahead. . .

It will go down as one of the great marvels of history that President Reagan, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and Pope John Paul II all achieved positions of crucial leadership at almost exactly the same moment.  Together, by the grace of a merciful God, that extraordinary trio accomplished what seemed impossible: the thwarting of the Communists’ global agenda, and the toppling of the theretofore impregnable Soviet government.

MITCH DANIELS - GOP PRESIDENTIAL TIMBER?

- Update 5/16/11 - FRC writes:  "...I've been asked a lot about the chances of Gov. Mitch "Truce" Daniels in 2012. On the heels of signing a bill to defund Planned Parenthood, Daniels managed to poke pro-lifers in the eye again when he answered a question about a possible running mate with Condoleezza Rice. Although she has stellar credentials on national defense, the former Secretary of State has long held pro-abortion views, which makes her a non-starter with social conservatives. It is ironic, however, that Governor Daniels seeks a truce with liberals while he attacks the sensibilities of pro-family conservatives within his own party.

Me:  Based on this report, I don't have much enthusiasm for any presidential aspirations he may have.

 -(Original post) - Mona Charen considers the facts on Indiana GOP Governor Mitch Daniels:

[...] Mild-mannered Daniels may well be the best chief executive in American government.

After stints as a Senate staffer, a senior adviser to Pres. Ronald Reagan, president of the Hudson Institute, president for North American operations at Eli Lilly, and director of the Office of Management and Budget under George W. Bush, Daniels was elected governor of Indiana in 2004. He was reelected in 2008 (when Obama carried the state), winning more votes than any candidate in the state’s history.

Inheriting a $600 million deficit, Daniels transformed it into a $370 million surplus within one year, without raising taxes. “You’d be amazed how much government you’ll never miss,” he grins. Six years on, Indiana now enjoys a AAA bond rating, boasts the fewest state workers per capita in the nation, enjoys the third-highest private-sector job growth in the nation, has seen property taxes drop by an average of 30 percent, and was ranked first in the Midwest for business climate by the Tax Foundation. Daniels was named Public Official of the Year in 2008 by Governing magazine.

Wow.  Impressive.  And he's pro-life, too.  Charen says his "pro-life and pro-family credentials could not be more solid."  [Yet, he downplays pro-life issues in favor of economic ones and so muddies his standing  to some degree amongst social conservatives.)

More on Daniels...

MIKE PENCE FOR PRESIDENT?

- Update 1/17/11 - Ralph Benko talks to Kathryn Jean Lopez about Mike Pence's vitues and why he would make an outstanding president.  Benko has set up a new website, "The Conservative Champion"

- Update 12/9/10 - cf. George Will's article: "Why Mike Pence Catches Conservatives' Eyes"

- Nolan Finley thinks he sounds pretty terrific.  Finley heard him speak recently at the Detroit Economic Club.  A lot of other people are pretty excited too, including David Limbaugh who wrote a column about Pence's talk on the Presidency at Hillsdale College back in September.  

"To restore American exceptionalism, we must end all this Keynesian spending and get back to the practice of free market economics," Pence told the audience. "The freedom to succeed must include the freedom to fail. The free market is what made America's economy the greatest in the world, and we cannot falter in our willingness to defend it."

Limbaugh:

For most of the rest of the speech, Pence laid out a blueprint for restoring the economy that focused on simplifying the tax code; adopting sound monetary policy, perhaps even a return to the gold standard; developing homegrown energy sources; reforming regulations to make them friendlier to job creators; and committing fully to free trade.

But according to Limbaugh, Pence said a lot more:

CHRISTINE O'DONNELL - AN EYE-OPENING ANALYSIS

John Podhoretz, editor of Commentary magazine, explains Christine O'Donnell's rise to fame and notoriety in an eye-opening, insightful article, "Christine O'Donnell, Made and Broken by TV."   I found it illuminating, convincing and dispiriting.  I think you need to read what Podhoretz has to say.    (HT: The Corner)

Update: On the other hand, Karl Rove points out that O'Donnell is right on the issues, and has done well (so far) in putting personal issues behind her.

 

SEN. JIM DeMINT (R-SC) - A CONSERVATIVE'S CONSERVATIVE

As I mentioned earlier, I accidentaly lost a number of previously published blog posts last night.  One of the posts featured Sen. Jim DeMint.  I found the article I had linked to originally.  It will be worth referring to in the days ahead.  New material:  Will Cain and Jim Geraghty discuss DeMint's amazing primary batting average in the Republican primaries:

Lindsey Graham: Tea Party Will Die Out – Republicans Will Move Away From “The Fringe”

I'm putting this in the "hard to believe department."  Is Lindsey Graham really so out of touch?  I would wager he will be gone before the tea party is gone.  Read the report here.

TIM PAWLENTY ON JON STEWART'S "THE DAILY SHOW"

To be honest, I hadn't had occasion before to listen in any sustained way to Tim Pawlenty, the Governor of Minnesota, and possible Republican Presidential Candidate in 2012.  Today Ed Morrissey posted three video segments of Pawlenty's appearance on the "Daily Show" last night.

Pawlenty strikes me as a genuinely impressive guy -- in command of facts,  down-to-earth, unruffled, one who laughs naturally, and genuinely likable.  The conversation was limited to domestic affairs.  Click here.   

"BREAKTHROUGH MOMENT" FOR REPUBLICAN WOMEN

Seems so.  Click here.  (HT: Drudge)

MUST VIEWING: JOHN BOEHNER'S SPEECH AGAINST THE HISTORIC HEALTH CARE VOTE

Just before the historic vote on the Obama/Pelosi health care bill Republican leader John Boehner delivered an historic MUST VIEW speech that will be referred to for weeks, months and years to come.  Ed Morrissey quotes Boehner and comments:

“In this economy, with this unemployment, with our desperate need for jobs and economic growth, is this really the time to raise taxes, to create bureaucracies, and burden every job creator in our land?” So began the final effort by House Minority Leader John Boehner to turn the tide on ObamaCare, mainly by answering a series of difficult questions. Boehner really caught fire in the middle of the speech when he asked Democrats if they had even bothered to read the bill or any of its sidebars or amendments, ending with a “Hell no, you haven’t!” Not surprisingly, this was one of the most popular moments for Hot Air commenters on the live thread. Most of it, however, was somber and sad, as Boehner said, “Shame on us, shame on this body, shame on each and every one of you who substitutes your will and your desires above those of your fellow countrymen.” Full speech is below:

CARVILLE, BEGALA, EMANUEL PLOTTED "OPERATION LIMBAUGH" BEGINNING LAST FALL...

The Democrat political/media chess game against Limbaugh continues.  Will Limbaugh prove to be the albatross the Democrats want to hang on the Republican party?  That's their  strategy as this article shows.  Will Limbaugh overcome the Democrat connivance against him (and the Republicans) and come out on top?  Stay tuned...    (HT: Drudge)

Update:  Victor Davis Hanson expatiates on Rush's appeal and his "certain sort of genius."  Definitely worth reading.

Update #2 -  Rush responds:  Challenges Obama to a debate.  Transcript here.  4 minute, 43 second audio here.

THE PROBLEM WITH THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP . . . THE CASE OF GOV. KATHLEEN SEBELIUS (D-KANS)

Update:  George Weigle - The Sebelius nomination is a challenge to Catholics.  Weigle offers his usual incisive, comprehensive commentary.  It's clear that the radical, pro-abortion Sebelius' nomination to head HHS is a test not only for Republicans, but for Catholics as well.

(Original Post) - The Family Research Council points out with regard to President Obama's pick for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS):  

With the exception so far of Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), the nomination of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-Kans.) -- arguably the most pro-abortion governor in the nation -- has been met by the Republican leadership with a collective yawn. Here is a woman who aligns herself against 80% of the country in suggesting that the government knows better than parents in children's health decisions, and yet the GOP can't muster the will to fight her nomination. As governor, she hosted a private reception for a notorious partial-birth abortionist, vetoed bills that would have made abortion clinics cleaner for women, and blocked court reforms that would have helped to prevent third-term abortions. Like President Obama, she even opposed protection for infants who are born alive during an abortion.

If Republicans won't take a stand now, when will they? Once Sebelius is confirmed, she will control the largest government agency in America with more power and resources to advance a radical social agenda that will drive a deeper wedge between parents and their children. Grassroots conservatives understand what's at stake here. Why doesn't the Republican leadership?    [emphases mine]

Me: Why should  anyone give money or support such a feckless party?  I wish it were otherwise.  Where is the leadership?  

LARRY KING LIVE -- BOBBY JINDAL COMMENTS ON RUSH LIMBAUGH

Ed Morrissey says Jindal acts like a party leader (video included).

Republicans and Democrats Differ on Support for Israel's Actions in Gaza

Jonah Goldberg posted the following:

From Rasmussen:

Sixty-two percent (62%) of Republicans back Israel’s decision to take military action against the Palestinians, but only half as many Democrats (31%) agree. A majority of Democrats (55%) say Israel should have tried to find a diplomatic solution first, a view shared by just 27% of Republicans.

While 75% of Republicans say Israel is an ally of the United States, just 55% of Democrats agree. Seven percent (7%) of Democrats say Israel is an enemy of America, but only one percent (1%) of Republicans say the same. For 21% of Republicans, Israel is somewhere in between, and 28% of Democrats agree.

I do like the bit about how Israelis should  have "tried a diplomatic solution first."  This is a classic example of ideological knee-jerkery substituting for information. Hamas launched (or permitted to be launched) 6,464 rockets into Israel over the last three years. Israel did little to nothing but try "diplomatic solutions."

Me:  I agree with Jonah Goldberg.  I don't understand what Democrats would have Israel do given there were 6,464 rockets launched against her.

DAVID BROOKS - GOP BATTLE LOOMS BETWEEN TRADITIONALISTS AND REFORMERS

Brooks thinks the Traditionalists (represented by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin, etc.) will win out in the short term because they have the money, current Congressional Republicans, and the  infrastructure.  He's not particularly happy about that since hs considers himself one of the Reformers (along with Ross Douthat, Ramesh Ponnuru, Yuval Levin, Jim Manzi, Rod Dreher, and Peggy Noonan).  Brooks' prediction:

In short, the Republican Party will probably veer right in the years ahead, and suffer more defeats. Then, finally, some new Reformist donors and organizers will emerge. They will build new institutions, new structures and new ideas, and the cycle of conservative ascendance will begin again.

Me: Is he right?  Maybe.  But I don't think so.  Furthermore, I doubt whether Ponnuru and Levin would be entirely comfortable with his label.  -- Aha, I was right.  Here is Yuval Levin responding:

".. The David Brooks column gets the basic picture wrong. I don’t think the notion of reform conservatism should be contrasted with or opposed to the views of the people Brooks calls the “traditionalists.” As I see it, the basic idea is to apply conservative principles and ingenuity to a

What happened yesterday?

Update:  National Review Online offers a symposium of views reflecting on the election and the state of the Republican party today.

Update:  Byron York offers a more lengthy and comprehensive explanation here.

--  Byron York offers one explanation - the Republican base wasn't that excited about McCain.

CONSERVATIVES ARE ASKING "WHEN WILL REPUBLICANS QUIT BEING WIMPS?"

Lots of conservatives are thinking along the lines Peter Kirsanow expresses [my emphases]:

. . . whether [Gwen] Ifill [vice-presidential debate moderator] betrays a bias in favor of Obama/Biden tonight is somewhat beside the point. I'll bet that it will be hard to detect any bias in the questions she asks or the manner in which she asks them. And that's precisely why her evident conflict of interest is so insidious. It's more often the questions that aren't asked that betray bias and unfairness.

Consider: I'd wager that if a poll had been conducted one year ago asking likely voters whether a candidate who had a working relationship with an unrepentant former terrorist had even the slightest chance of being elected president, at least 80% would answer "No." Yet here we are five weeks before the election and Obama leads in most polls. That isn't because of Obama's extraordinary accomplishments, his impressive experience or invincibly superior policies. It's because the media (with one exception) haven't asked Obama about his relationship with Ayers (among other thing).

Keep reading . . . 

PEOPLE MAGAZINE GRABS ONE OF THE FIRST INTERVIEWS WITH THE PALINS AND McCAINS

People Magazine grabbed an interview with the McCains and Palins backstage after today's announcement of Gov. Sarah Palin to be McCain's vice-presidential running mate choice.  A few excerpts:

Mr. Palin, what does Sen. McCain need to know about working with your wife?
TODD PALIN: She's a hard worker and she's not wired normal. (Laughter)

Do you feel ready to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?
SARAH: Absolutely. Yup, yup. Especially with a good team around us.

Gov. Palin, when you were 13 weeks pregnant, last December, you had an amniocentesis that determined Trig had Down syndrome.

SARAH: I was grateful to have all those months to prepare. I can't imagine the moms that are surprised at the end. I think they have it a lot harder.  (more . . .)

On another site someone left an insightful comment:

To those saying Sarah Palin is a heartbeat away from the Presidency, not quite. She is an election and a heartbeat away. Barack Obama is only an election away.  . .

IS GOV. SARAH PALIN GOING TO BE PRESIDENT McCAIN'S VICE-PRESIDENT?

Update:  YES  YES  YES !!!   Palin will be Vice-President!  Wow!  I am excited! 

- I hope so.  She would bring a pro-life message to the nation that would stir up another round of national debate on abortion big time.  Palin is the mother of five children, the latest a Down Syndrome child.  Kathryn Jean Lopez says:

PEGGY NOONAN - DEMOCRATS EMPHASIZE STRUGGLING SINGLE MOTHERS; REPUBLICANS TAXED AND STRESSED SMALL SHOPKEEPERS

Peggy Noonan contrasts the differing emphases of the Democrat and Republican parties:

Democrats in the end speak most of, and seem to hold the most sympathy for, the beset-upon single mother without medical coverage for her children, and the soldier back from the war who needs more help with post-traumatic stress disorder. They express the most sympathy for the needy, the yearning, the marginalized and unwell. For those, in short, who need more help from the government, meaning from the government's treasury, meaning the money got from taxpayers.

Who happen, also, to be a generally beset-upon group.

Democrats show little expressed sympathy for those who work to make the money the government taxes to help the beset-upon mother and the soldier and the kids. They express little sympathy for the middle-aged woman who owns a small dry cleaner and employs six people and is, actually, day to day, stressed and depressed from the burden of state, local and federal taxes, and regulations, and lawsuits, and meetings with the accountant, and complaints as to insufficient or incorrect efforts to meet guidelines regarding various employee/employer rules and regulations. At Republican conventions they express sympathy for this woman, as they do for those who are entrepreneurial, who start businesses and create jobs and build things. Republicans have, that is, sympathy for taxpayers. But they don't dwell all that much, or show much expressed sympathy for, the sick mother with the uninsured kids, and the soldier with the shot nerves.

Neither party ever gets it quite right, the balance between the taxed and the needy, the suffering of one sort and the suffering of another. You might say that in this both parties are equally cold and equally warm, only to two different classes of citizens.

Do you agree with Peggy Noonan?  Has she got it right or not?

DOES JOHN McCAIN HAVE A THOUGHT-OUT PHILOSOPHY AND WORLDVIEW?

Peggy Noonan doesn't think so, or at least she hasn't yet seen any evidence of it.  I have to agree.  Excerpts:

One always wonders with Mr. McCain: What exactly does he feel passionately about, what great question? Or rather, what does he stand for, really? For he often shows passion, but he rarely speaks of meaning. The issues that summon his full engagement are issues on which he's been challenged by his party and others. McCain, to McCain, is defined by his maverickness. That's who he is. . .

He has positions, but a series of separate, discrete and seemingly unconnected stands do not coherence make. Mr. McCain, in public, does not dig down to the meaning of things, to why he stands where he stands, to what understanding of life drives his political decisions. But voters hunger for coherence, for a philosophical thread that holds all the positions together. . .

What overall view of the world, of strategy, of American meaning, is being expressed in Iraq? Who are we in the world? What do we mean to do in the 21st century? And in what way does this connect to a philosophical view of life, of the meaning of being here on earth as Americans? In the most successful political careers there is a purpose, a guiding philosophy. Not an ideology—ideology is something imposed from above, something abstract dreamed up by an intellectual. Philosophy isn't imposed from above, it bubbles up from the ground, from life. And its expression is missing with Mr. McCain.

L. BRENT BOZELL WARNS THE REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT: DON'T ASSUME CONSERVATIVES WILL FALL INTO LINE AND BACK McCAIN

Bozell has written a genuinely useful column, offering an historical review of  Republican establishment miscalculations.  They are about to do it again unless they change course dramatically.

For 20 years, the moderate establishment of the Republican Party has told conservatives to sit down, shut up and do as we're told. History shows that sometimes we bite the bullet. But not always. I absolutely guarantee that this year we cannot be taken for granted. This is a movement fed up with betrayals, and they've come one after the other.

Bozell points out that  through his surrogates, McCain is attacking Republican leaders in talk radio and elsewhere.  Bozell says, This is beyond folly. It is political suicide.  (more. . .)

Dobson Endorses Mike Huckabee

For the record, here is Dobson's statement issued February 7, 2008.

I am endorsing Gov. Mike Huckabee for President of the United States today. My decision comes in the wake of my statement on Super Tuesday that I could not vote for Sen. John McCain, even if he goes on to win the Republican nomination. His record on the institution of the family and other conservative issues makes his candidacy a matter of conscience and concern for me.

That left two pro-family candidates whom I could support, but I was reluctant to choose between them. However, the decision by Gov. Mitt Romney to put his campaign "on hold" changes the political landscape. The remaining candidate for whom I could vote is Gov. Huckabee. His unwavering positions on

DR. DOBSON ON McCAIN

Read by Laura Ingraham today (via Hugh Hewitt, with my emphases):

"I'm deeply disappointed the Republican Party seems poised to select a nominee who did not support a Constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage, who voted for embryonic stem cell research to kill nascent human beings, who opposed tax cuts that ended the marriage penalty, and who has little regard for freedom of speech, who organized the Gang of 14 to preserve filibusters, and has a legendary temper and often uses foul and obscene language.

ANN COULTER WOULD VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON OVER JOHN McCAIN

Hmmm..  It's pretty clear she doesn't like McCain.  Video here.

MICHAEL GERSON DISPLAYS INEPTITUDE IN CRITICIZING FRED THOMPSON

Michael Gerson wrote some wonderful speeches for President Bush, but as a columnist and author he seems to have lost his way.  His taking Fred Thompson to task so misrepresents Thompson that it makes Gerson himself look inept, unreliable and unserious.  Jonathan Adler clears up the misrepresentation.

Thompson-Romney 2008

Kathryn Lopez over at The Corner posts an intriguing e-mail from New Hampshire on a best case scenario for Republicans.  Here it is:

I have a crazy idea I'd like to float by you.

The two candidates most acceptable to conservatives, Thompson and Romney, are in not so good shape. The three least acceptable, Huckabee, McCain, and Giuliani, are in relatively good shape. It's entirely possible that the two conservatives will be knocked out early and the eventual nominee will be unacceptable to a large segment of the base.

Fred has chances to win SC; Mitt has chances to win MI. I want both to win and I think there is a way to make it happen.

Two months ago, in a WSJ interview, Mitt opined that the federal government should have a Chief Operating Officer. He himself would be the perfect choice. He "loves data" - he loves working with details.

My crazy idea is that Thompson and Romney join forces now. Thompson would be the President and CEO, Romney would be the COO.  Each would play to his strengths. Fred would work on broad principles and

John McCain's Real Record (Negatives) via Mark R. Levin

Update 10/26/08 - Mark R. Levin now fears for the nation if Obama is elected President. Before deciding between Obama and McCain, do read Levin's article. Remember he is the one who initially had reservations about McCain. Now he considers those reservations trivial compared to electing Obama. Update 10/24/08 - Anyone wavering between McCain and Obama, should read Charles Krauthammer's article today. It is genuinely must reading. I implore you to read it. Krauthammer outlines why it would be the height of folly to vote for Obama. Yes, McCain has negatives, but they are almost microscopic versus the alternative of voting for Obama. Update 9/4/08 - I need to update this post. Over recent months many people have googled "McCain's negatives" and have come to this post. While I disagree with McCain on many of his positions as outlined below in my original posts, in my mind there is no contest between him and Barack Obama. For Obama's negatives, click here (and especially here for a list of all my posts dealing with Obama and his positions). With the addition of Gov. Sarah Palin to the Republican ticket, I am soundly convinced that the two of them would be infinitely better for America than Obama and Biden. - Mark Levin has also come out in support of McCain/Palin. Click here.

Subtitled Obstacles in the Way of Conservative Support.   I earlier blogged on McCain's negatives here.

Update 1/14/08 - Andy McCarthy takes a look at McCain's foreign policy mentality (apart from the Iraq war, where he is right).  Hugh Hewitt posts his own list of McCain's negatives.

Update 1/23/08 - Michelle Malkin -Americans Should Remember John McCain's Open -Borders Demagoguery

Mike Huckabee's Church in Little Rock

Drudge linked to an article on Huckabee's preaching in a New Hampshire church last weekend.  That article mentioned that Huckabee attends The Church at Rock Creek in Little Rock.  I looked at his church's website and learned that it holds a Monday night service with a Q&A afterwards. The church has grown from 25 people in 1995 to over 5,000 today. Check the church's website.

On another matter, Bill Kristol wrote an extraordinarily respectful piece on Mike Huckabee in today's New York Times.  From the last  three paragraphs:

. . . His campaigning in New Hampshire has been impressive. At a Friday night event at New England College in Henniker, he played bass with a local rock band, Mama Kicks. One secular New Hampshire Republican’s reaction: “Gee, he’s not some kind of crazy Christian. He’s an ordinary American.”

In general, here in New Hampshire he’s emphasized social issues far less than in Iowa (though he doesn’t waffle when asked about them). Instead he’s stressed

Huckabee's Chairman Ed Rollins Wanted to Go Negative

This article presents a fascinating sketch of Ed Rollins and his relationship to Huckabee.  It sheds light on Huckabee's recent nixing the idea of blanketing Iowa with negative ads against Romney.  (HT: Drudge)

Is Fred Thompson the Most Thoughtful of the Republican Presidential Candidates?

I have been slowly coming to that conclusion.  Fred Thompson's closing YouTube message to the people of Iowa reinforces that persuasion.  He offers substance and consistency and thoughtfulness that I find impressive. Peter Robinson at The Corner says the following (my underlining):

While the other contenders are frantically saturating the Iowa airwaves with 30- and 60-second attack ads—Romney is guiltiest, if only because he’s richest—Thompson has sat himself down, looked into a camera, and spoken for a quarter of an hour, calmly and straightforwardly making his case.  I myself find this impressive—in a way, moving.  Thompson seems to have stepped out of the eighteenth century.  He trusts voters to think.  And if the comments on YouTube are at all representative, plenty of people agree.

Me:  Positively, I am impressed with Thompson.  Negatively, I don't feel happy about  rich people (e.g. Romney) totally outspending  every other candidate and blanketing a state with unending TV ads.

Peter Robinson Calls this Huckabee Ad "Incomparably the Finest Ad of the Season"

Click here.   Read on for the context of Peter Robinson's comment.

Trying to figure out what's going on in the Hawkeye state, I spent a few moments just now looking over Huckabee's campaign videos on YouTube. Without exception, they're brilliant—brilliant. In the ads in which he himself appears, Huckabee is engaging, warm, relaxed, and persuasive; the best I can recall since the Gipper himself. And the "surrogate" or "third-party" ads are almost as good. The "Switch to Huckabee" series adopts the lightness and cleverness of recent Apple ads; they're arresting, funny, hip. (That's right. An ad about a Baptist preacher is hip.) And the ad entitled "It's a Whole New Race" manages to be amusing and devastating all at once. Incomparably the finest ad of the season, "It's a Whole New Race" amounts to something a lot like a work of political genius.

Huckabee has also produced what some call the "Floating Cross Christmas Message" ad.  Ron Paul doesn't like it, and quotes Sinclair Lewis,  "When fascism comes it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying

McCain's Negatives

This morning Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) endorsed John McCain for President of the United States.  So did the Manchester (NH) Union Leader.

McCain has many virtues. Mark Levin lists his negatives:    (Update: Drew Cline of the Union Leader responds to Levin's critique at the end of this post; Further update 12/18/07 - Andy McCarthy responds to Drew Cline, and so does Mark Levin)

In sum, John McCain has been weak on homeland security, joining with numerous liberal Democrats to argue for closing Guantanamo Bay, applying the Geneva Conventions to unlawful enemy combatants, extending certain constitutional rights to detainees, limiting tried and true interrogation techniques, and conferring amnesty on illegal aliens (which would include OTMs; that fact that Bush supported the same thing is no defense).  He aggressively opposed the Bush tax cuts, even after they were scaled back.  He is behind the McCain-Lieberman Stewardship Act, which is a

Reports of the Demise of Social Conservatism are Greatly Exaggerated

Jeff Bell of the Weekly Standard does an excellent job sketching the history of social conservatism and its continuing vitality. Click here.  [Update: 12/17/07 As indicated below, I added a paragraph from this article to the post.] 

A quote from his article:

The striking thing about the history of the left is its singleness of vision amid a breathtaking variety of means. [He offers a list].The goal of the left is the liberation of mankind from traditional institutions and codes of behavior, especially moral codes. It seeks a restoration (or achievement) of a state of nature, one of absolute individual liberty--universal happiness without the need for laws.

The proposed political way stations chosen by the left in its drive toward this vision have varied greatly. To name a few: abolition of private property (socialism); prohibition of Christianity and/or propagation by the political elite of a new civil religion to replace it; confiscatory taxation, especially at death; regulation of political speech to limit the ability of certain individuals or classes to affect politics; the takeover of education to instill new values and moral habits in the population; confiscation of privately held firearms; gradual phasing out of the nation-state; displacement of the traditional family in favor of child-rearing by an enlightened governmental elite; and the inversion of sexual morality to elevate recreational sex and reduce the prestige of procreative sex. This is, it must be emphasized, a partial list.   . . . [I added this paragraph after the initial post].

His concluding paragraph:

Put aside the stereotypes. Whatever its virtues or flaws, social conservatism isn't going away. It is not, and never was, the crazy aunt in the attic. It continues to be the essential building block of Republican presidential majorities.

This article makes a significant contribution towards understanding our current cultural situation.

Businessmen Don't Necessarily Make Good Presidents

Or, put differently, you don't have to be a good businessman to be a good president.  Peter Robinson, of the National Review, dissents from NR's endorsement of Mitt Romney saying:

This just in from Andy Ferguson, mainstay of The Weekly Standard and the author of one of the best books of 2007, Land of Lincoln:  Adventures in Abe's America (if you have yet to read Land of Lincoln, be sure to buy a copy for your stocking):

Lincoln was a terrible manager and businessman who had at least two enterprises go bankrupt underneath him, probably three. There are several pages on the subject in…"Land of Lincoln."…[See] pages 172 - 174.

The idea that the dispositions and skills that make a man successful in business and money-making are somehow identical to, or even compatible with, the gifts that make a great democratic leader is simply preposterous. Would Ross Perot have been a good leader, or Henry Ford? Anyone who thinks this knows nothing of human nature, democratic politics, or corporate management. In my opinion.

"National Review" Taken to Task for Endorsing Romney

Joe Carter (of the Huckabee campaign) says:                                                 

Has National Review jumped the shark?

I don’t mean to be glib or facetious in raising the question for I love the magazine dearly. NR was a formative influence on my political philosophy and continues to shape my thinking. It introduced me to conservative ideas, policies, statesmen, and writers. Indeed, three of my favorite conservatives—Ramesh Ponnuru, Ross Douthat, and Byron York—still write for the august publication.

But over the past few years (at least that is the time that I began noticing) there has been a shift to what I call "Manhattan Conservatism." Because almost all of the NR staff lives and works in New York City, their concerns and values tend to reflect a NYC/DC-centric urban cosmopolitism. They've adopted a watered-down form of big-tent fusionism in which embracing any non-liberal ideas are enough to earn you the label of "conservative" (a Manhattan Conservative can have the same views on abortion and gay marriage as the liberal intelligentsia so long as they embrace supply-side

Has National Review jumped the shark?

I don’t mean to be glib or facetious in raising the question for I love the magazine dearly. NR was a formative influence on my political philosophy and continues to shape my thinking. It introduced me to conservative ideas, policies, statesmen, and writers. Indeed, three of my favorite conservatives—Ramesh Ponnuru, Ross Douthat, and Byron York—still write for the august publication.

But over the past few years (at least that is the time that I began noticing) there has been a shift to what I call "Manhattan Conservatism." Because almost all of the NR staff lives and works in New York City, their concerns and values tend to reflect a NYC/DC-centric urban cosmopolitism. They've adopted a watered-down form of big-tent fusionism in which embracing any non-liberal ideas are enough to earn you the label of "conservative" (a Manhattan Conservative can have the same views on abortion and gay marriage as the liberal intelligentsia so long as they embrace supply-side

Hadley Arkes: What Rudy Needs to Do to Win Pro-Life Support

Hadley Arkes, one of the sharpest strategic minds around, offers his analysis.   This follows on an article I reported on earlier.

According to Gallup, Republicans Report a Much Higher Level of Mental Health

Since I don't put a whole lot of stock in polls of any kind, I don't put much stock in this one either. On the other hand, I can think of reasons why it might be somewhat credible.  For those who are interested:

PRINCETON, NJ — Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats or independents to rate their mental health as excellent, according to data from the last four November Gallup Health and Healthcare polls. Fifty-eight percent of Republicans report having excellent mental health, compared to 43% of independents and 38% of Democrats. This relationship between party identification and reports of excellent mental health persists even within categories of income, age, gender, church attendance, and education.  (more. .)

Mitt Romney Attacked by Former Head of the Massachusetts Republican Party

In the interest of even-handedness, since I've posted negatives on Mike Huckabee, I should also post serious criticisms of Mitt Romney.  Here is Byron York reporting:

A scathing attack on Mitt Romney today from Jim Rappaport, the former head of the Massachusetts Republican party who just held a conference call with reporters to announce his endorsement of Rudy Giuliani. Rappaport praised Giuliani's record in New York and said Romney "has a strong record of showmanship as opposed to actual performance." Discussing Romney's relationship with the Massachusetts state legislature, Rappaport said of the former governor, "His word is no good…Mitt Romney would say one thing in a meeting and literally go out of the meeting to the press and tell the opposite story. There was no desire in the legislature to be accommodating to him because they couldn't trust him." Romney, Rappaport continued, "will be clear today on what he believes today, and he'll be clear tomorrow on what he believes tomorrow, but they may be different things."

Who is the Real Mike Huckabee?

I confess I am not sure.  Today Robert Novak came out with a blistering column that agrees with a strongly negative National Review editorial  a week ago.  Novak titled his column "The False Conservative."

Huckabee is campaigning as a conservative, but serious Republicans know that he is a high-tax, protectionist advocate of big government and a strong hand in the Oval Office directing the lives of Americans.

Huckabee's pro-life stance causes conservatives like me to want to like him, but accusations like the following I find really troubling:

But Huckabee simply does not fit within normal boundaries of economic conservatism, such as when he criticized President Bush's veto of a Democratic expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Calling global warming a "moral issue" mandating "a biblical duty" to prevent climate change, he has endorsed a cap-and-trade system that is anathema to the free market.

Read the whole article.  Conservatives need to weigh Huckabee's pros and cons carefully.

Hadley Arkes: The Nomination and Election of Rudy Giuliani Would Mark the End of the Republican Party as the Pro-Life Party in Our Politics

Hadley Arkes, the Ney Professor of American Institutions at Amherst College, articulates the same position James Dobson has taken.  That fact, given Arkes' academic reputation, should weigh heavily on the minds of those tempted to dismiss Dobson as an unreasonable man of the Christian Right.

After arguing his case, Arkes says:

It is conceivable, then, that from the standpoint of the pro-lifers it might be better to lose to Hillary Clinton than to win with Rudy Giuliani. The Republican party left standing after the defeat would still be a pro-life party. . .  The Republicans might be diminished, but they would be essentially intact as a pro-life party; and, when the electoral winds shift again, they have a chance of coming back with their character intact.

As to the question of abortion being a moral issue or not, Arkes invokes the disagreement between Lincoln and Douglas regarding slavery.

During the famous debate between Lincoln and Douglas, Douglas professed to be neutral on the matter of slavery. He professed to have reached no moral judgment. And so, he concluded, people should be free in the separate territories to vote slavery up or down. But, as Lincoln pointed out, he had indeed reached a moral judgment. If he had regarded slavery as a wrong—as Douglas had regarded polygamy—he would have understood that a wrong is that which no one ought to do, that anyone may be properly restrained from doing. To say slavery is something legitimate to choose is to say that slavery stood in the class of things “not wrong.”  (my emphasis)

In an eerie echo, Giuliani reproduced precisely the same argument in an interview with Charlie Rose. . . [Read on . . ]

National Review Online (NRO) Doesn't Like Mike Huckabee

Today's NRO editorial on Mike Huckabee attacks his domestic programs and record.  Earlier tonight on television I saw Fred Barnes and Charles Krauthammer point out Huckabee's lack of experience in foreign policy.  I reproduce NRO's editorial below for the record so that one might be aware of the arguments some conservative make against Huckabee.

When they debated economic issues in Dearborn, Mich., most of the Republican presidential candidates talked about how good the economic statistics look. Mike Huckabee was the candidate who offered sympathy for the public’s anxieties. So it has been throughout the campaign. Huckabee, more than the other Republican candidates, understands

Michael Gerson (Former Speechwriter for President Bush) Interviews Mike Huckabee

Perhaps the most interesting lines in this interesting article may be found in the last paragraph:

During our conversation, Huckabee's most compelling response concerned his background as a pastor. "There isn't a social pathology that I wouldn't be able to put a face to. I've talked with a pregnant 14-year-old who hasn't been able to tell her parents, with a 17-year-old high school student who believes he is gay and doesn't know how to break the news, with parents who have a son on life support after a motorcycle accident. . . . It makes me a different kind of public official, not as rigid, not blind to problems."

And that is not a bad thing -- in a Republican, in a candidate or in a president.

Me:  Yes.  True.

John Bolton, Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. - A Hero to me (and others)

For delightful nuggets gleaned from John Bolton’s new book, Surrender Is Not an Option, read Jay Nordlinger's comments and excerpts here.

Huckabee's "Compassion" Problem

Don Feder outlines once again the hesitations and qualms that dyed-in-the-wool conservatives have towards Mike Huckabee.  As Feder puts it, "Huckabee has bought into the left's definition of compassion, a mushy mix of sentimentality and victimology."  Those of us who harbor warm  feelings towards Huckabee must look steely-eyed at these criticisms and come to terms with them one way or another.  I have blogged on Huckabee before here and here.

Update:
Today the Washington Post published a positive article on Huckabee titled, How Huckabee Could Rock the 2008 Vote.

The Daily Telegaph Lists the Top 100 Conservatives & Liberals in the U.S.

Click here.

Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee Analyzed by Byron York

I cited John Fund's column on Mike Huckabee (along with a rebuttal, plus other commentators) on a Quick Take post last Friday.  Today, National Review Online published  a major article by Byron York first published as its Sept. 10th cover story. I think it adds significant detail and depth to coverage on Huckabee. 

Update:  Huckabee answers his critics on Wolf  Blitzer's CNN "Situation Room" (vide0).  Joe Carter at  The Evangelical Outpost provides a major, extensive rebuttal to the Club for Growth's tax criticisms of Huckabee.   Huckabee's responses and other articles supporting him can always be found at www.mikehuckabee.com   Plus, for an astonishing amount of current daily press and blog material on Huckabee, check Patrick Rufini's  site here. 

Update 10/31/07 - The transcript of Hugh Hewitt's lengthy radio interview with Huckabee is here.  Hewitt commented on his blog: "The Reaction to Huckabee from my audience on air and in e-mail is not good at all.. .  The answers on illegals who turn 18 are being very poorly received, as is the governor's endorsement of an anti-federalist one-size-fits-all-states workplace smoking ban. 

Me: At this point I remain an interested, as yet uncommitted, bystander.

William Kristol Predicts a 2008 Republican Presidential Victory

Hmmm.  Shall we say "counter-intuitive?"  Interesting points.  Click here.