Video: Huckabee says he sounds “like a prophet” on Pakistan
posted at 9:45 am on January 4, 2008 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
That’s not the only thing he says. In fact, he almost sounds like two different candidates at the same time. He simultaneously says “real Republicans” aren’t upset that he won in Iowa, when a lot of real Republicans are upset, and not because those Republicans don’t care about people who make less than $50k, and that he’s the real Reagan Republican. The Republicans who are upset are so because they want a candidate who is strong on foreign policy, and Huckabee just doesn’t project that strength (and secondarily, they want an economic conservative as opposed to an economic populist). He downplays that foreign policy weakness toward the end of the interview with one serious fact that I’ve mentioned vis a vis the Democrats — foreign policy experience just didn’t matter in the caucuses. We’re at war and it didn’t matter. It seems not to have mattered on the GOP side, too. It’s during that section that the “prophet” comment comes up. I think and hope that Huckabee can get stronger on foreign policy, but likening himself to Reagan on economics and tossing out the “prophet” line doesn’t send the “I’m ready to get studied up” vibe imho.
Negatives aside, listen to Huckabee’s three points about small business. It’s as conservative as anything he has said on economics. It’s quite good and easy to digest as a sound bite and put into a series of ads. It’s going to be unwise going forward for Huckabee’s opponents and their supporters to keep throwing out the “religious bigots” line against him. That’ll be the quickest way to divide the GOP and turn off voters who were recently being asked and often told that they would have to vote for Giuliani even though he doesn’t represent their issues well. Huckabee’s opponents are going to have to outflank him on issues and be more articulate in expressing them than he is.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
And just how are they going to do that in light of the current love fest going on in the Mass Market Media for all things Huckster?
Hillary may not be able to beat Edwards and Obama but she has a chance against him.
LakeRuins on January 4, 2008 at 9:50 AM
I watched Huckabee’s victory speech last night, and it was right out of the Bob Shrum playbook. I halfway expected him to start chanting “The People vs. The Powerful!”
On the other hand, people all over the place (like my wife) were probably distracted because they kept thinking “Hey, is that Chuck Norris behind him?” Not to mention “Who is that hot blonde?”
Dudley Smith on January 4, 2008 at 9:51 AM
New poll: Mitt seizing lead from McCain in N.H.
TheBigOldDog on January 4, 2008 at 9:56 AM
If evangelical voters in other states are as identity-focused as Iowa voters seem to have been, that approach is going to be of limited effectiveness. This story was depressing as all heck:
Huckabee’s record is weak in all of those issues. That was pointed out repeatedly not just by Romney, but by the media and others. Unfortunately, it looks like Huckabee’s likability and identity trumped issues in this one.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 9:56 AM
His mantra that he’s a tax cutting, small government conservative seems to be a lie. Convincing and well-delivered, but a lie nonetheless. Will his spin be allowed to stand as truth?
MT on January 4, 2008 at 9:58 AM
Yup, that plus his informal grass-roots network that I’ve talked about once or twice — the megachurch network. No other candidate can replicate that, and it’s going to be tough as can be to penetrate it on the issues. But calling those people who are in that network “bigots” and the like is the quickest way I know of to turn millions of GOP voters into independents. Or given Huckabee’s populism, moderate Democrats.
That network is less powerful in NH, though, than it is in Iowa. So it’s not as though Huckabee is unstoppable. He’s not.
Bryan on January 4, 2008 at 10:00 AM
Exit question: How many Iowans are trying to chew off their own arms today?
James on January 4, 2008 at 10:02 AM
If these two guys hold up as the standard bearers, it will confirm my growing suspicion that America desperately wants to be on another Holiday from History. 9/11 might as well have been Pearl Harbor for all the relevance it had to the voters in Iowa.
Dudley Smith on January 4, 2008 at 10:02 AM
True. I hope we don’t see much more of that.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 10:03 AM
Me too. I’m fed up with it and I don’t even support Huckabee.
Bryan on January 4, 2008 at 10:09 AM
Somebody please make this yahoo go away, we can do better, can’t we?
Tyrs Fury on January 4, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Good Lord, this guy is full of shit. A more complete examination — exposé — of his glaring weaknesses and double talk on immigration, taxation, foreign policy (prophet?) and the war on terror will yield widespread disillusion among his nitwit followers.
Jaibones on January 4, 2008 at 10:11 AM
I hope there is a fight between the pseudo-social cons that support Huckabee and actual conservatives. The Republican Party might suffer in the short term, but conservatism would win in the long term. It is a big deal that Iowa voted for Huckabee. It’s also a big disgrace.
davenp35 on January 4, 2008 at 10:16 AM
Ok, my problems with Preacher Huck:
1) He’s named “Huckabee”, violating the “no silly names” rule.
2) He’s Governor of Arkansas. Been there, done that. Bzzzzt!
3) Hey, It’s IOWA! Who died and made that stupid state God?
mojo on January 4, 2008 at 10:18 AM
I think Huckabee is a flawed candidate, but so are all the other candidates. At this point I would probably vote for Fred (though I’m not 100%), but I don’t know if he can pull it out. But I don’t think Huckabee is as liberals as many *cough*Slublog*cough* believe him to be. ;)
I understand the worries about him and his record from Arkansas, but you could basically do the same with all the top candidates. Fred may be the only one that doesn’t have many negatives in his voting record and that’s partly because he was basically an unaccomplished senator. If he was a governor (or had been senator for a long period), he would probably be in the same boat.
Any of the top candidates would be (and are) better than the Democrats. I think many of the flaws of the candidates can be softened by their VP choice and by their cabinet and advisors.
If Huckabee grabs Fred (or any of the other top guys) as his VP, surrounds himself with solid conservatives on fiscal issues, passionate guys on immigration and knowledgeable, serious people on foreign policy, are the non-social cons really going to sit at home and sulk?
As Bryan points out, this is especially interesting after they told social cons they would have to suck it up and vote for Rudy when he was the frontrunner.
wardrobedoor on January 4, 2008 at 10:19 AM
How are his evangelical supporters being called bigots?
broker1 on January 4, 2008 at 10:19 AM
Yeah, the fantasy notion of the “heartland” being the repository of sane, reliable, “normal” people has been shattered. I saw blithering idiots slavering over false messiahs. Disgusting and pathetic, childish and nauseating.
JiangxiDad on January 4, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Here we go, roller coaster ride.
Huckabee is either finally listening to his advisers or picked up some better ones, his pastor speak is thick with buzz words and pick me I’m the poor picked on little guy representing the victims of America.
He just related himself to Seabiscuit on the Today show.
Even if he were the politician he portrayed in this clip he would be a much better leader than his record shows.
The problem is, I don’t believe him.
If the new definition of Republican is slick talking liberal with a bible then thats Huck changing the direction of Conservatism.
Faith is fine, faith is good just not for the price tag that Huckabee comes with.
Speakup on January 4, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Heh. He may not be personally liberal, but he certainly had those tendencies in his governance style in Arkansas.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Guess I’m not a “real” Republican, thanks Huck.
Did have to hand it to him on “excessive taxation, excessive regulation, excessive litigation”. Words that work are like glittering paper and a pretty bow, making a box of wormy chocolates look like a tempting gift. Hillary knows this literally, Huck knows this rhetorically.
I just have to have faith in the American people that there is still a majority of us out here who see through the packaging to the maggots inside.
And that Fred or Mitt will come up with an effective way to demonstrate the wisdom of X-raying your presidential presents before accepting them.
RushBaby on January 4, 2008 at 10:32 AM
The Evangelicals feel threatened. Now they are waging a passive aggressive Jihad on the GOP.
ronsfi on January 4, 2008 at 10:34 AM
Honestly, those social conservatives who sulked and threatened when Giuliani was peaking now simply don’t have much of a leg to stand on when it comes to appealing to party unity. The threats really upset the rest of the GOP coalition and those folks aren’t in much of a mood to be told to play nice by the people who were threatening them only months ago.
(That’s not aimed at you, btw)
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 10:38 AM
They would be more productive focusing on those who would use the tools of fascism and totalitarianism on the left to eliminate religion from our nation.
davenp35 on January 4, 2008 at 10:38 AM
Faith in the American people’s inherent good sense derives from the supposition that they were raised by healthy parents aided by healthy institutions (church, school, media, political leaders, heroes, trustworthy public servants etc). Faith without these underpinnings is wishful thinking.
JiangxiDad on January 4, 2008 at 10:44 AM
Bryan, you mean like several people who comment here at HotAir? Just last night, someone called “billy” said
and pjf626 quipped
Congratulations, Huckabee supporters: You are not only Bible-thumpers, but you are stupid, and your candidate humps Bibles.
Frankly, Bryan & co., I’m surprised more isn’t said about this kind of denigration. If this situation were applied to race instead of religion, people would cry racism and bigotry. But here, it’s just politics and free speech.
Not a complaint, per se; just an observation.
fourstringfuror on January 4, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Oh, and go Fred!
fourstringfuror on January 4, 2008 at 10:48 AM
Bryan, supra:
Yes, and in reply, they told the rest of us that we could stick it, and that they would bolt the party. So please, don’t cite to the exquisite sensibilities of the delicate evangelical. It’s not persuasive.
The GOP is about to take it in the teeth anyway. Did you see the Democrats last night? They’re on fire. Meanwhile, as someone else here put it, we on the right still can’t decide who we hate the least. We’re done. So we might as well throw down and have it out. Soon we’re not going to be running anything but our mouths anyway.
paul006 on January 4, 2008 at 10:48 AM
Get that creep out of here!
Hilts on January 4, 2008 at 10:48 AM
Bryan drives a Supra? Nice.
fourstringfuror on January 4, 2008 at 10:50 AM
paul006
I agree with everything you wrote. Too many in the GOP are putting purity over victory. The coming Huckashmuck disaster
is one which we will so richly deserve.
Hilts on January 4, 2008 at 10:50 AM
Agreed. But somebody at some point somebody in the Republican party has to stand up and say to the candidates (and their supporters), “Enough children. We’ve got bigger problems ahead (Obama or Hillary).”
I will admit that I would rather vote for Huckabee than Rudy. I don’t trust Rudy on anything other than being a strong leader. But in the end, I would probably vote for him over the Democrat because he would be the better choice. I wouldn’t be excited about it, but I would do it. Honestly, I’m not excited about any of the candidates, but you take what you can get.
My question still remains. I know you (Slublog) have been vocal here and at Ace’s about your opposition to Huckabee. Others have been even stronger in the comments. Would you pull the level for Huckabee if he surrounds himself with solid, proven conservatives?
wardrobedoor on January 4, 2008 at 10:53 AM
Everyone should be focused on keeping both Huckabee and McCain from getting the nomination. If someone else gets the nomination, I’ll either be happy or at least content.
davenp35 on January 4, 2008 at 10:54 AM
The Morning After – The Poseidon Adventure is an apt metaphor for what happened to the GOP last night.
ronsfi on January 4, 2008 at 10:54 AM
C’mon. Get a grip. Democrats don’t vet their candidates. It’s about color, or gender, or sexual identity. No wonder it’s all sweetness and light on that side.
There will be ONE Rep. candidate in November, and roughly half the country will vote for him.
JiangxiDad on January 4, 2008 at 10:57 AM
It’s not just the record in Arkansas. Just listen to his rhetoric on the stump or in interviews. On anything other than abortion and same sex marriage, if you listen to him talk about an issue it will sound exactly the same as a Democrat. It is all about class warfare and government being the answer, that kind of rhetoric should be anathema to anybody that calls themselves a conservative.
Dudley Smith on January 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM
So one of the questions to huckabee at any of the upcoming debates should be: in the event you are elected president, who do you plan to have as your secState, SecDef, etc.
hell, someone should be asking that of all the candidates, at least then we might have some idea what direction they’ll take.
Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on January 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM
At this point? No. What Huckabee has to prove is that he’s willing to surround himself with solid, proven conservatives (Ed Rollins was a mistake) and also bone up on national security – and fast. I want him to meet with people who understand the war we’re fighting and seriously change his worldview.
One criticism of Huckabee is that his clemency record proves he’s soft on crime. I think it goes deeper than that. If you look at how Huckabee made his decisions, he was often too dismissive of the advice he was given by law enforcement professionals. The ability to heed wise counsel is an important attribute in an executive.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 11:03 AM
The big winner here is the liberal media. This huge “backlash” of Christians who hate conservatism didn’t exist until about two weeks ago when the media started running two dozen stories a day on it.
The media desperately need a Republican candidate they can paint as “another George Bush” and they got a guy who’s even MORE evangelical and Socially “compassionate” than Bush ever thought of being. This is a real coup for the Democrat Party.
The amount of power the mass media still have in the 21st Century amazes me, and it probably surprised even them. I’m only glad they didn’t feel their oats and decide to make Ron Paul our candidate instead – ’cause it looks like they could have pulled it off. Either guy will yield same outcome in November, but Paul would have been an even bigger embarrassment in the meantime.
logis on January 4, 2008 at 11:21 AM
Huckabee creeps me out like a used car salesman, but folks at HotAir decrying name-calling against evangelicals rings pretty hollow. This is the least friendly major right-wing blog out there for Christians with anything less than battleship-thick skin. AllahPundit makes a special point constantly to mock evangelicals, question the existence of God, and generally stick his finger in the eye of anyone that takes the Bible seriously. The commenters here mostly reflect that, as well.
I don’t care for megachurch Christianity, and I don’t consider myself an evangelical, but the extent to which I am a Bible-believing Christian, I can’t abide the bubbling hostility here at HotAir against my world-view. That’s why I rarely come here and even more rarely comment. It’s a great site, to be sure, but I know it’s not for unwashed, flat-earther Bible thumpers like myself; that’s been clear for some time now.
You make some good points about the dangers of anti-evangelical bias, but you might want to talk with your own fellow staff members first if you really care to do anything about it.
spmat on January 4, 2008 at 11:21 AM
I hate to say it, but it IS important that Huck is a Christian Evangelical PREACHER.
We’ve tried to get the Islamists to become more secular, to NOT let their Religious leaders have political power… so we are going to possibly elect a PREACHER as PRESIDENT?
Don’t you see how this will fly in the face of everything we’ve tried to do in the Middle East, and reinforce the Meme that this IS a Religious Crusade against poor downtrodden Islam?
Romeo13 on January 4, 2008 at 11:31 AM
Agreed. That would certainly help calm my fears, but mine aren’t as deep as yours.
wardrobedoor on January 4, 2008 at 11:35 AM
No, I don’t. Explain.
fourstringfuror on January 4, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Yeah, it goes deeper than disagreement on issues with me. I simply do not trust that Huckabee would listen to advisers on foreign policy.
Slublog on January 4, 2008 at 11:41 AM
OK, pretty simple. Big bad Satan America has been telling you, the poor Islamist, that its WRONG to have your religious leaders run your government. That Sharia law comes out of the 16th Century… but that its NOT about religion, its about being Civilized….
And then they elect a RELIGIOUS Leader, a Mullah in your world view, to run the Government?
Don’t you see how Islamists can spin this right back into the Anti Islam Crusade meme that we have bent over backwards to avoid?
This, in their minds, will PROOVE that it was all religious to start with.
Romeo13 on January 4, 2008 at 11:47 AM
At some point Huckabee is going to have to give a different answer to criticism than “Look! Chuck Norris!”.
I swear, every time someone really dug into Huckabee on his positions, or lack thereof, Churck Norris showed up somewhere on camera.
Jimmie on January 4, 2008 at 11:57 AM
At the risk of sounding argumentative, I’ll take your bait.
1)The US does not run its government based on a set precepts from the Bible (or the Torah, or the Koran, or the Hare Krishna, for that matter)
2)The “poor Islamist” does not choose his leader. The leader is chosen for him.
3)Sharia law does come out of the 16th century.
4)We have not elected a religious leader. We haven’t elected anyone yet.
5)The President is not a religious leader.
6)Islam is not “downtrodden;” downtrodding perhaps, but not downtrodden.
7)If elected, Huckabee would not be the first former minister/pastor to take the Oath.
8)America is the Great Satan. Viewing an elected government official as a mullah would be counterintuitive.
9)Jihad was declared against America long ago. Electing a “religious leader” does not change the fact that Muslims want us dead.
10) The Crusade idea is hard to defend when the “poor Islamist” has been raping, murdering, torturing, imprisoning, and degrading Christians, Jews, Hindus, and basically every other human population on earth, including other Muslims, for the past 1500 years. There is no modern-day Crusade against the “poor Islamist.”
fourstringfuror on January 4, 2008 at 1:01 PM
paul006 on January 4, 2008 at 10:48 AM
I agree with Paul. Even Michael Steele was forced to concede on Fox News on Wednesday night that the Democrats are energized and have a group of candidates whose supporters really believe in them, whereas there is very little energy on the Republican side. Steele believed that the energy would come once we get further into the nominating process. Perhaps that is so, but the Dems have outraised us 3:1.
I’ve never seen a Republican party that is so demoralized. This is going to be a drubbing of epic proportions, regardless of whether Hillary or Obama is the Democratic candidate.
Outlander on January 4, 2008 at 1:01 PM
Huck sez:
1) Evangelicals, Catholics, and the Jewish community support him.
What? No Mormons?
2) The government shouldn’t come stomping down on Americans.
You mean like banning smoking?
3) Real Republicans like Huck.
4) I’m the only man that can save the republican party.
5) I am the new Ronald Reagan.
6) The Republican party is afraid of him.
7) Get the government off the backs of business.
You mean like smoking bans and raising taxes?
Here it comes….
8) I am a prophet.
Oh baby!!!
9) And did I mention I am the new Reagan?
csdeven on January 4, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Sorry, you are looking at it from a Western perspective, not the perspective that THEY have been taught for the last two generations.
I did not say it was rational, but it IS exactly what will happen.
Propoganda is not necesarily for the enemy, its also used on your own people to convince them of somthing.
We are trying to fight a religious war, without calling it a religious war… and to convince our enemy that its NOT about religion.
We castigate them for putting religious people in power, but then potentialy elect a Religious Leader (how they will see it) to the Presidency.
Would be a HUGE propoganda boost to those we are trying to defeat.
Romeo13 on January 4, 2008 at 1:13 PM
There is no “in their minds” about it. They would be exactly correct. Many of these evangelicals voted for Huck because he is the same religion. How is that not voting for a religious leader?
csdeven on January 4, 2008 at 1:21 PM
Twice now you’ve claimed we’re fighting a religious war. I don’t know of any religious war we’re fighting right now – care to elaborate? I know we’re fighting a war against radical Islam, but that doesn’t make it a religious war. In a sense you’re right – Muslims have declared jihad against us, so in that light they are fighting a religious war. We, however, are not. We don’t prop up any one religion here, and never will.
Huckabee is a pastor. He leads (or led) a local congregation. He does not lead the Southern Baptist Convention, nor would he lead the Christian church (whatever that is), much less an American Church, if elected.
You’ve also said twice that we’re castigating “them” for putting “religious people” in power. Who are we castigating? Where? We have called for extreme elements in Iraq to compromise and put forth a viable solution for the governance of Iraq. Is that what you mean? That’s a call for moderation, not castigation.
Essentially, I disagree with your position that electing Huckabee would somehow give the enemy more reason to kill us. We’re already marked for extermination; this wouldn’t change anything.
fourstringfuror on January 4, 2008 at 1:33 PM
I believe your entire ten points are based on the assumption that the Islamic radicals are rational. They are not. If they were rational we wouldn’t be in Iraq trying to restore order and Benazer Bhutto would be alive.
csdeven on January 4, 2008 at 1:55 PM
Once again, you look at it from OUR perspective, not theirs.
For most of the Islamists, it is their religious duty to Jihad, thus a religious war.
We have been trying to convince the more moderate members of Islam that this is NOT a religious war… that we are fighting just these groups, so that we don’t force them to choose sides…. trying to keep them neutral.
If we choose a “PREACHER” as President, the Islamists will simply say…” See, America is NOT a secular country… they are trying to get rid of ALL of Islam”
Propoganda is the war of Perception… not of reality…
This will give a huge boost to the meme of America being against ALL of Islam, of reinforcing their belief that this is a religious conflict… not one of culture.
Romeo13 on January 4, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Now this was a wonderful analogy, JiangxiDad’s reality check, aside. I loved it.
One good outcome of last night was that csdeven’s ‘rabidity’ has shifted. Losses are very sobering. Must say that my friend has also become more humble and collected. Keep on this path and we might yet solve this. Know that I felt your pain last night. Always good on you,
Entelechy on January 4, 2008 at 2:57 PM
What a depressing post, Bryan. So basically you’re encouraging us to warm up to Huckabee, because he’s not going anywhere? And not bring up the elephant in the room, the fact that they vote for and against based on religion, so as to not offend their wittle feelings? If our party and our movement is going to be taken down I for one will not be going down without a fight.
Patriot33 on January 4, 2008 at 3:30 PM
CNBC PICKING ON HUCKABEE! CNBC ANTI-REPUBLICAN BIAS!!
Right? Right?
That being said, a lot of what Huck was saying in this video (eg taxation regulation litigation) was why I started paying attention to Huckabee in the first place. Pity about his big government history, in contrast..
Reaps on January 4, 2008 at 10:25 PM
Comment pages: