Huzzah, he’s finally seen the light. Or maybe not so much. “Among the Democratic candidates, there’s only one that voted for this resolution. And this is exactly what [President] Bush and [Vice President Dick] Cheney wanted,” former North Carolina …

Even more disturbing to me is that none of the leading candidates from either party seems to be talking about these issues in a serious professional manner. We, the people, should be demanding more from our candidates than sound-bites and gotcha politics.

Yup. We’re just not a serious nation, in spite of the fact that we live in serious times.

For the record, I don’t view the NIE question to Huckabee as a gotcha. It was a fair, news-driven question that he ought have had an answer for.

Some do have better records than others, but none of them are lighting a Reaganesque fire under anyone, and only one or two of the top tier guys even seem capable of doing so. And that’s a problem.

Bryan on December 5, 2007 at 10:41 AM

True Bryan, it’s problematic but needs to be tolerated to some degree. We can kiss the days of hoping for another Reagan goodbye. Wishful thinking isn’t going to change the reality that these candidates are tacking away from the disappointing conservative meltdown we got from Bush.

Mitt, Rudy, Huck & Company may be problematic, but the alternative is catastrophic.

I think that was the Professor’s point of contention.

Am I the only one who thinks that Edwards is simply angling for the Veep Slot?

Probably.

But Huckabee’s stance on Gitmo and his lack of knowledge of the NIE forced my hand. I’d rather have praised him for taking a strong, informed stand that made sense.

Bryan,

That begs the question if a governor non-DC insider truly has the experience to become President. Carter and Clinton were dismal failures when it came to applying realistic solutions to foreign affairs issues. Reagan was successful but he was governor of a state that is bigger than some nations.

On the whole, I am very suspicious of any candidate who cannot articulate very basic aspects of national security and interational affairs. Things like the NIE are far more complex than the way they are presented in the media and a candidate who cannot even discuss the dumbed down version of these things is unfit for office IMO. Huckabee is falling short.

Even more disturbing to me is that none of the leading candidates from either party seems to be talking about these issues in a serious professional manner. We, the people, should be demanding more from our candidates than sound-bites and gotcha politics.

Uh, John, we are at war. Have been since 2001. Google it.

Since 1998, actually. Clinton declared war on terrorism didn’t he?

lorien1973 on December 5, 2007 at 10:40 AM

I would say more like since 1979 when Iran attacked Americas’ embassy, took hostages, and began chanting “death to America”

Professor Blather on December 5, 2007 at 9:43 AM

Sorry, Prof, but I call ‘em like I see ‘em, and I’m bothered that Huckabee is a) showing big government tendencies and b) evidently clueless on foreign policy when we’re at war. It’s not building up conservatism to omit reporting on problems we have with candidates on our own side. Believe me, I didn’t like writing two negative posts on Huckabee so close together. But Huckabee’s stance on Gitmo and his lack of knowledge of the NIE forced my hand. I’d rather have praised him for taking a strong, informed stand that made sense. Sure, I could have taken a pass on reporting about them at all, but is that what you want? I’d rather build a real conservative candidate up than criticize anyone, but we have to face some facts here: None of our top-tier candidates have perfectly consistent conservative records. Some do have better records than others, but none of them are lighting a Reaganesque fire under anyone, and only one or two of the top tier guys even seem capable of doing so. And that’s a problem.

Uh, John, we are at war. Have been since 2001. Google it.

Since 1998, actually. Clinton declared war on terrorism didn’t he?

I’m off to someplace that’s actually working to advance conservatism rather than tear it down.

Professor Blather on December 5, 2007 at 9:43 AM

Goodbye, cruel world!

Professor Blather on December 5, 2007 at 9:43 AM

Great point Professor. Thanks.
.
Huckabee & Tancredo ’08.

After so many years, it’s nice to see it’s making a comeback.

Thanks Silky Pony.
Thanks Half Black/Half White Man.
Thanks Man in Women’s Body.

…. the Greatest Show on Earth.

You know, that thing that Mike Huckabee hadn’t heard of until yesterday.

Knee-jerk. Exactly.

Sort of like simply having to – reflexively – include an attack on the current unpopular flavor of the month among Republican candidates … even in the midst of a fair criticism of our actual, you know, opponents.

Sorry, knuckleheads. This knee-jerk Fred-hate and Rudy-hate and Mac-hate and lately (now that he’s rising in the polls) Huck-hate is now just too much. This is what I have the MSM for. Fair criticisms are fine. Better yet, suggestions on how to improve policy positions or enhance electability would be great. Now there’s an idea! Actually working to improve Republican politics and actually enhancing our electoral prospects! Somebody should look into that.

If you want to elect Hillary, have fun. The circular firing squad is always entertaining. But I’m now officially both bored and saddened by it.

The simple reality is that neither Fred nor Huck nor Rudy nor Mac nor Mitt are bad men. Not one of them is as bad as they are routinely made to look here.

I expect to hear this sort of stupidity from liberals and Democrats. In fact, it’s their job. But not here. Here, I sort of expected to see constructive criticism. And maybe even a little positive support.

Instead, it’s all knee-jerk here. In almost every post and every thread. Even where – like here – it doesn’t even fit. And many of the commenters are following the pundits’ descent into perma-snark like lemmings pouring over an electoral cliff.

No offense … but the tone has changed here. And I really don’t think some of you are noticing. And it is decidedly unhelpful.

We can do so much better. And we better start doing it.

I’m off to someplace that’s actually working to advance conservatism rather than tear it down. Maybe I’ll be back after the election, when we can get back to talking about football and Jessica Alba. Or maybe not.

In the meantime, maybe you could think about that tone. Or about what you’re really trying to accomplish.

Peace out, knuckleheads.

Anybody know what he’s up to these days? ;-0

Edwards’ foreign policy is, essentially, Jacques Chirac’s: Figure out what the American administration is doing and then just do the opposite.

I think that’s the impression he’d like to give during his campaign to shore up the base; once in office, though, I think he’d fall back on his (and Bubba’s) trusted “ignore it and it will go away” policy.