Sunday, January 13, 2008

Arthur Branch Lives!

The previously moribund and laconic Fred Thompson fired a broadside against Governor Huckabee in the recent South Carolina debate. Reading from notes, Thompson catalogued a litany of supposed "sins" by the apostate Huckabee. It's true that he doesn't hew to the rabid orthodoxy of talk-show conservatism, and that he confounds the elites. But Thompson's shot represents part of what we decry about the political process. It's barely better than the freak show, reducing nuanced policy positions to half-truth soundbites, in a format that does not lend itself to response. It's time to grow up.

My first reaction was "well, looks like Arthur Branch nailed his lines, and on the first take, too." The outburst reminded me of someone who half-wakes from a dream, and loudly and urgently blurts out something incomprehensible. A mom would sooth, "that's ok sweetie, just go back to sleep."

But that's just me being snarky.

As for the charges themselves, The Calvinator takes on one of them below – school choice and vouchers. As for the NEA of New Hampshire support, i find it foolhardy to eschew the support of a large group of Americans. I'm glad that some of these unions are recognizing that a large portion of their members are conservative, and wish to express their support of a conservative candidate, not just the same-old Democratic entrenchment. Reagan understood that, garnering the endorsement of the Teamsters and PATCO, and 44% of the union vote in the 1980 election. McCain echoed that approach in the 2000 primary.

Blame America first? How can anyone honestly look at Huckabee's platform and conclude that? It's just an immature bromide. I've never heard any leader talk more authentically and passionately about the founding fathers, about the Declaration of Independence. Huckabee is insistent about American sovereignty. He was the first candidate to come out strongly against the Law of the Sea Treaty, due to concerns about our sovereignty. He talks about the pride of knowing you're in a country that people want to break into, not out of. Huckabee loves America.

Guantanamo? Here are Huckabee's comments in a press release from December. He advocates the same position as John McCain, which is that if the legal assumption bears out (awaiting a SCOTUS ruling) that no additional rights would be granted, then there is tremendous symbolic benefit from closing Guantanamo and moving the combatants to Ft. Leavenworth. By the way, i couldn't find any online evidence that Fred Thompson has visited Guantanamo for a first-hand view, as the other candidates have, including Huckabee.

Taxpayer-funded programs for illegals? There is nothing in Huckabee's platform that would do that. In fact, his immigration plan is tough enough for the endorsement of the founder of the Minutemen, Jim Gilchrist. The reference is surely to the college scholarship plan that Huckabee had in Arkansas, where children of illegals could qualify for a state college scholarship, provided they met the academic criteria AND were applying for US citizenship. Besides that, if you think of this issue logically, we already provide taxpayer funding education for illegals, with our K-12 public schools. This position has been enforced by the Supreme Court, and can be justified on economic rationality grounds. If they're here, it's better to be educated than not. The solution isn't to leave them uneducated; the solution is to choke off the flow first.

Ban smoking nationwide? Again, there is nothing in Huckabee's platform that calls for that. He has stated, at the Lance Armstrong Cancer Forum last summer, that if Congress signed a bill banning smoking in public places, that he would sign it, as he did in Arkansas. Based on worker safety issues. It's a reasonable position, though i do agree there is some merit to the federalism criticism that Fred makes.

But the main point of all this is that this Thompson approach doesn't lend itself to a grown-up review of the issues facing us. Thompson earlier called for more substantive Lincoln-Douglas type debates, but then backed off (chickened out?) when Huckabee took him up on the offer. BRING IT ON, i say. His broadside in the Myrtle Beach was the very example of what he had decried about the process. Thompson was right then; what happened?

P.S. Thompson also (tellingly?) flubbed the definition of the "Reagan Coalition", leaving off a big chunk of it. He said the coalition was "limited government and a strong national defense." He made no mention of social conservatives, drawn to Reagan and the GOP for their advocacy of pro-life policies, and a general regard for traditional family values. These voters have flocked to the GOP regardless of their economic position.


No comments: