Today Robert Novak calls Huckabee "The False Conservative" in the editorial pages of the Washington Post. As I have said before, what scares fusionist "conservatives" about Huckabee is that he is the true conservative, not them, and he demonstrates their economic liberalism (in the classic definition of "liberalism"--meaning completely unrestrained free markets) may not be not necessary to form a governing majority. Novak's article pretty clearly admits this:
The rise of evangelical Christians as the force that blasted the GOP out of minority status during the past generation always contained an inherent danger: What if these new Republican acolytes supported not merely a conventional conservative but one of their own? That has happened with Huckabee, a former Baptist minister educated at Ouachita Baptist University and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. The danger is a serious contender for the nomination who passes the litmus test of social conservatives on abortion, gay marriage and gun control but is far removed from the conservative-libertarian model of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.
Notice in the last sentence, Novak switches to the term "conservative-libertarian," showing that this is what he really means by "conservative." He also goes on to complain about Huckabee's desire to conserve the environment, saying it is "anathema to the free market." But what's so "conservative" about supporting absolute free markets even when they destroy the environment, families, or civil society?
Novak also calls evangelicals (and really should include practicing Catholics too) an "inherent danger" even as he admits that the Republicans would have been relegated to permanent minority status--probably would have gone the way of the Whigs--if it weren't for Christian social conservatives joining the Party. It sounds like Novak defines "danger" as dropping the libertarian part of Novak's hyphenated-conservatism, rather than the danger of becoming secularist states like Europe that inevitably slide into socialism when all the moral undergirdings that make economic liberties possible are gone.
Thank you, Mr. Novak, for coming clean about exactly where you and your ilk are coming from in your exaggerated criticisms of Gov. Huckabee.
P.S. I've been reading the other encyclicals over the Thanksgiving holiday and will get back to my commentary on Huckabee and Catholic social thought shortly.
19 comments:
Well said K Street.
Novak can now join Fred Barnes, Ann Coulter, Charles Krauthammer, Jonah Goldberg, and Hugh Hewitt (any others you can think of???) that have revealed their true self. They all seem to be more happy with power inside Washington and greed of power and money. I have taken note of them and will know better when reading their articles and others like them.
Anyone who listens to anything Robert Novak has to say is an idiot. He has always reminded me of Howard Cosell, of whom Jimmy Cannon once wrote "His name is Cohen, he wears a toupee, and he says he tells it like it is". I'm glad someone commented on his nefarious article.
It'is a sad thing when conservative comentators attack a true conservative in the race. Mike Huckabee realizes that America is not so much left or right but wants leadership that is simply pro America. He is clear on his views, but admits that America might not agree with all his views. Most Americans want to see our political parties work together for the betterment of our country. This is certainly not the case now. Democrats and Republicans are currently sparring to see which party can damage the other the most. We need a leader who can unite America behind a set of values that are already held by our people. Our Constitution makes clear the concepts that define this country. I believe that Mike Huckabee is that leader
Thank you! Very well stated. I read Novak this morning and I was greatly irritated, but did not have time nor energy to take him on.
Bravo!
Notice how Novak talks about evangelicals with a kind of "them" quality, even though they are the bedrock of the Republican Party. It's clear he's an elitist, a term we usually designate for the John Kerrys of the world. Novak represents that entrepreneurial wing of the GOP that worships the almighty Dollar. Now he's making it seem like the supply-siders are the REAL conservatives, and how dare anyone challenge that irreplaceable pillar of Republican orthodoxy.
The world has really turned upside down when so-called conservatives in the the Republican Party, a party that is supposed to have a more or less Christian mindset, attack other conservatives because they manifest an inkling of concern for the poor. We cant have that!
Thanks K Street. I see I wasn't the only one choking over my morning coffee as I read the Novak smear piece. I also wrote a response article, "Robert Novak - The False Journalist
Honey...I'm Home! In Jack Nicholson Style, Robert Novak Swings His Hatchet At Huckabee
First paragraph excerpt:
f"The only thing that Robert Novak's article, "The False Conservative", proves is that Novak has apparently mastered the 'copy and paste' function on his keyboard. No journalistic digging and reporting, only repetition of rants by Arkansas discontents and organizations who feel their power threatened."
To read the rest of the article, go to www.politicsandchristianity.com
i think the novaks of the republican party have used Christians long enough, the Christian voting block is okay with him, as long as it gets bush or whomever he wants elected, but when someone like huckabee comes along novak and his ilk start having a temper tantrum.
wahh, wahh, wahh...
well, mr. novak, welcome to the big voting block that now wants mike huckabee, the very voting block y'all think you owned.
surprise. you DON'T.
wrong......
and now it's time for you to kick down, pay...
Novak is the sort of person who Frank Meyer, of "In Defense of Freedom" fame, would have termed a traditionalist. While Huckabee may not fit the mold of a mid-50's conservative, as Meyer defined in "Collectivism Rebaptized", and which Meyer called a conservative-libertarian, Meyer did not suffer from Novak's tunnel-vision when it came to addressing new challenges; the environment is but one of the challenges we face today that was not part of the traditional conservative agenda at conservatism's birth because in the mid-50's the environment was not on anyone's political and philosophical radar. To read Novak is to go back in time to a simpler time, one that is just within the grasp perhaps for someone of Novak's limited vision.
I appreciate this retort as well. Novak has been giving me the "willies" since he released his book, "The Prince of Darkness"
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. (Ep 6:12)
Notice the "rulers of the darkness" - and Prince is part of the ruling class. I know we're all taught not to judge a book by it's cover, but come on, how many Christians are going to willingly pick up the Satanic bible or Alister Crowley's the Book of the Law and read it?
I digress... great job waking everyone up to the "true nature" of Novak.
On a different note, could you post some thoughts on the FairTax. I'm sure you're aware how Mike feels about it, and the media keeps bashing him, saying it's his plan, yet it's clearly not, and its the work of 2 decades of economists and such from the whole country. Another thing to note, when Mike talks about the FairTax, he has more first-hand knowledge of the tax system, the way it works and the failed plans to fix it than any other candidate, yet, all the media wants to do, is distort the beauty of the plan... the only plan to reverse our downward financial spiral we seem to be in...
[ stepping down off the soap box ]
Thanks!
What most Americans want is a government that allows for competition and free market capitalism to work their "magic", which is wonderful, yet allow for government to do what, by definition, they are supposed to do - that is to govern. To govern is to provide certain restraints where obviously necessary by using a system of checks and balances and to provide for certain cooperation of all for important aspects, which otherwise have no way to be taken care of, such as infrastructure, national defense, a justice system, and the like.
Huckabee is a realist and is genuinely concerned for the people of this nation to have a good quality of life and good opportunity to climb the economic ladder. The elitist feel threatened by this, because they are afraid of change. They reason they are afraid of change is because what is happening now has been working, for them, and any deviation from that scares them.
If only they could see that Huckabee's policies will only help them even more, because when people at the lower and middle class are empowered with a way to the next rung on the ladder, it actually does help the wealthy to be even wealthier.
As an example, Huckabee would put a real emphasis on preventative medicine. The owner of a pharmaceutical company that makes the drugs that are necessary when disease is in the latter stages is not interested in putting the power into the hands of the consumers of health care, as Huckabee suggest. But we all know that this would be the best scenario for the well-being of all of the people. Think how much better the economy could be, as a whole, if a greater percentage of Americans are able to work and pay taxes, rather than simply not be able to work due to unnecessary illness and require government assistance to survive.
Always remember how huge the font was on the Declaration of Independence for the words, "WE THE PEOPLE...".
They did that on purpose. Don't ever forget it.
Let these elitists' attacks roll off like water on a duck's back and press on with support for a guy like Huckabee who is truly out to improve the quality of life of "WE THE PEOPLE". Take on the task one person at a time and make sure that you help that person to know how they can do their part to help, so that we get that multiplying effect. That's how the founding fathers envisioned our ability to maintain our freedoms and our nation's greatness. Be sure to do your part. It's already starting to work for Huckabee - evidence: Romney has outspent Huckabee 50:1, but Huckabee will win Iowa and is passing Romney in National polling. In the last 2 weeks, Huckabee has moved from being 17% behind Guiliani in National polling to only 11% behind. That's real progress that can only come from having policies that make good common sense. 1 reach 2 and help those 2 to reach 2 and repeat the process. Go Huckabelievers!
This blogg does not support free speech. Last night I posted a detailed notice to point out Mike's disregard for following the law of the land and today it was removed. I have posted a similar onte on other Huckabee related blogs to notice a trend of Huckabee supporters not supporting free speech. Can someone explain to me why you fear issues which should be debated?
Robert Novak has also attacked Mitt, Rudy and a few others.... Just because he attacked Mike Huckabee does not imply he is an idiot as others imply but simply pointing out a few points. I would agree Ann Coulter is a nut but keep in mind when we have a era where people do not follow the rule of law as Huckabee confirms he will not then our nation is a at risk.
Excellent work!
You helped inspire a post I created today titled "When you Cry Wolf, Mean It!" on www.thatsjustcrazy.com ; in which I left a link to your great article.
http://justcrazypolitics.blogspot.com/2007/11/when-you-cry-wolf-mean-it.html
Thanks again for your analysis!
Conservatives are against free markets? I thought the Democrats were against that? I question this concept of conservatives being against free markets, and want to see evidence.
It's not about being against free markets. Free markets work great most of the time. But sometimes market incentives are not aligned with the long-term good of society. For instance, they don't produce enough conservation of natural resources because the payoff is too far in the future for profit-seekers. Employers also prefer that workers dump their children and elderly parents in institutionalized care so they can produce more and consume more, not caring that this diminshes the quality of life or education of the next generation, because there is no guaranteed payoff for the employer from family-based care. The question is, in the limited cases where free markets conflict with moral values and the long-term good of society, which should win out? Are free markets absolute, or is there a higher criterion against which government action should be judged?
Hey K Street!
The campaign needs some help collecting petition signitures over in Delaware. I'm trying to build an email database of MD and DC area volunteers for this and other projects. You have a very large following! Would you consider soliciting area volunteers to provide an email? I'm in contact with the campaign for ways that we can help on the ground. Having a database could help extend the campaigns organization. Let me know, and thanks!
Erik
www.mdforhuckabee.blogspot.com
K street, First time on blog, very impressed. I'll link to you.
Post a Comment