The Devil His Due: The secular wing of conservatism is panicking over the ascendancy of Huckabee

[marmar]

from OurFuture.org:



The Devil His Due
Submitted by David Neiwert on December 18, 2007 - 2:23pm.


I suppose progressives should sit back and enjoy the moment of schadenfreude provided by the spectacle of secular movement conservatives freaking out over the recent ascension of Mike Huckabee's presidential candidacy. But some important lessons for Democrats and progressives lie therein too, and taking stock of them will play a critical role in their success or failure not just in 2008 but beyond.

The moral to the Huckabee story: You got to dance with the one who brung you.

The conservative movement's core has always been the pro-corporate, pro-business right, but it has swelled its ranks by wrapping itself in a cultural conservatism, built around the religious right, that attracted the votes of a lot of working-class people. Now the rabble, in the person of Huckabee, are threatening to take over, and the secular right doesn't like it a bit.

John Cole calls it "the Huckabee Panic," embodied perhaps by Rich Lowry's anti-Huckabee screed at NRO. As Atrios notes, some of the rhetoric is surprising.

The Carpetbagger Report offered up some ideas as to why this is happening -- including Huckabee's positions on taxes, on foreign policy, and on immigration, which are generally anathema to the secular right. He also notes Kevin Drum's wise observation:

I think this brand of yahooism puts off mainstream urban conservatives every bit as much as it does mainstream urban liberals. They're afraid that this time, it's not just a line of patter to keep the yokels in line.

My own pet theory is that the modern conservative movement, not really based any longer on actual principles but rather being about the acquisition of power, is frightened by Huckabee's candidacy mainly because he is all but certain to lose in the general election.

...(snip)...

These are the kinds of things progressive voters need to think about in the coming year as they choose their nominee. We shouldn't be taking for granted the fact that Republicans are stumbling badly and the opportunity for Democrats to make major gains in 2008 looms large. We also ought to seize the opportunity to make progressive politics a genuine, viable, and powerful political force for years to come. And that will not happen unless we stop selling our electoral souls to a devil who always wants his due. .......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://commonsense.ourfuture.org/devil_his_due?tx=3

[bryant69]

1. I don't know - that's part of it

But I think there are different wings of the Conservative movement who genuinely disagree with each other. Somewhat like Labor and Environmentalists in our own party. President Bush has been good at mollifying them all (largely by fooling Conservative Christians and giving them the judges they want); Huckabee doesn't look like he is going to be as skilled. But then none of the candidates seem like the sort to hold the coalition together.

Bryant
Check it out -> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[applegrove]

2. I knew this was coming. The last thing the GOP wants is a politician who

is the real McCoy.

[AndyTiedye]

3. I Sure Hope they Can Stop Him, Because Our Candidates Can't

Huckabee is really scary.

[Ikonoklast]

7. He'd get slaughtered in the general election

I'd run a yellow dog agin' him and win.

[gatorboy]

10. Why so certain?

[Ikonoklast]

13. Tons of negative stuff on him from Arkansas

He was, shall we say, less than ethical when it came to soliciting and recieving 'offerings' from supporters when in office there. He still has that ministers' sense of entitlement from his flock.

If he even gets close to the Rep nomination, look to see the other Puke candidates hammer his questionable ethics.

They have the ammunition.

[AndyTiedye]

15. So Was Bush**. None of the Dirt Sticks to Repigs 'Cause the MSM Won't Let It

[Hersheygirl]

20. Huckabee does not have the friends in high places

Like Bush did. Do you really think those who run the republican party will let him be the nominee? All one has to do is remember what they did to McCain when he became a threat to "their" candidate. They'll find a way to get rid of him.

[Ikonoklast]

21. Bingo

The 'money' will not back a maverick that they cannot control.

Huck will fade; all this is over ONE debate where he did marginally better than the other idiots.

[gatorboy]

23. See post #16

Plus what did McCain in wasn't necessarily the doings of big business. McCain had a good chance of beating Bush even without the corporate sponsorship. It was Bush's play to the bigot base ithat sealed the deal. The same folks that would push Huck through in droves.

[gatorboy]

18. And so have probably 80% of politicians out there.

Especially the other Repuke candidates. They're not going to call him out on unethical business doings that you could more than likely find in few of their own closets.
You might get him on his AIDS comments, or his release of the serial rapist. But that other stuff is definitely not gonna stick.

[TheWatcher]

29. Do you really need to be reminded what happened in 2000?

You dismiss this at your Peril.

They steal elections.

They do ANYTHING to keep, acquire, or retain power.

How is it that we have been through 7 years of this crap, and people still do not get it?

People had this same attitude about Bush.

Have we forgotten what happened?

[cali]

12. I'll say it again: Your fear of Huckabee

beating any of our candidates is absurd. He bleeds repuke support. You ought to see the hatin-on-huck threads in freeperville. He does not even appeal to those rabid nutcases.

[AndyTiedye]

19. I Sure Hope You are Right

[TheWatcher]

30. You transcend absurdity.

As usual.

:rofl:

[blondeatlast]

33. If Gravel gets the nomination it'll be close but the Dems win. Huckabee's a

"speaking in tongues"-ish nutcase. He'll be a laughing stock.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

37. ofcourse they can. nt

[TwilightGardener]

4. We'll get the secular conservatives on our side in 2008--it's going to be

a Dem blowout if Huckabee is nominated.

[Happyhippychick]

5. I agree.

[ulysses]

6. do we *want* the secular conservatives on our side?

They may be more well-mannered as houseguests than the religious conservatives, but still.

[TwilightGardener]

8. Yep--we've got to pull over at least SOME Repubs to win--

I want the smart, fiscally conservative ones who don't give a rat's ass about fetuses and family values. I DON'T want the racist born-again home-schoolin' mental midgets. The GOP can keep those.

[ulysses]

9. what do we give as bait?

[TwilightGardener]

11. Either Hillary or Obama. Wall Street is already lining up behind Hillary, and

I don't think they'll shy away from Obama, either--he's been pretty good about fiscal responsibility in the Senate.

[ulysses]

14. LOL - I meant in terms of policy.

Although, with the Hillary/Obama answer, I guess I got the answer I was looking for.

[readmoreoften]

22. In other words: throw workers under the bus.

As gay workers, we get it twice.

What's the way to win secular conservatives? Strong small business protection coupled with a strong secular agenda will make the medicine (ie labor protection) go down. These folks might rather hold union negotiations than be stuck in a forced covenant marriage.

[Leopolds Ghost]

27. A "strong secular agenda" will not increase working class support for programs to benefit

the working class. It will achieve what the Spanish left achieved by anti-clericalism -- needlessly alienate 70% of the working class and lead to defeat for their cherished programs.

All Dems have to do is follow the Constitution. This benefits religious and non-religious people.

[walldude]

25. Not true.. we don't need any repubs to win.. we need people to vote

We aren't going to make any friends on the other side, what we need it to get out the 40-50% of registered voters who don't bother to show up out to vote.

[blondeatlast]

35. Exactly. We need reluctant voters and the general public tends to be more leftist

than they would ever claim.

A pro-active social and fiscal policy will win them over.

[Leopolds Ghost]

26. You want more fiscal conservatives in the Dem party because they are "secular"?

Talk about throwing the working class under the bus (not to mention most upper-middle class, secular "moderates" are downright racist and classist, that is why Nixon and Reagan won them over in the first place.)

What Dems need are populists, socially moderate working class RINOs who are tired of cultural warfare and Republican economic betrayal. Most of them are religious but not extreme promoters of "Bush values". Guys like Huckabee who preach intolerance from the pulpit make them nervous. They are not afraid to vote for a liberal candidate who "speaks their language".

We don't need pocketbook voting Republicans who vote DLC when they split ticket -- that just creates more Blue Dogs who are hostile to the rural and urban working class.

[gatorboy]

16. I mentioned this last week in another thread here.

The only problem with the Big Business section of the right is they have no idea who this guy is. He shouldn't have even gotten past single digits in polling when everyone was still fawning over Rudy but he did.
I don't think they're scared so much as cautious. They're not sure if he'll play ball with the pro-corporate part of the party. With Rudy or Mitt there was no trouble. They were already waist deep in corporate. But Huckabee they're not sure about.

It could go eaither way. Like someone mentioned before, many in Big Business have backed Hillary and possibly Obama. But if pro-corporate think Huckabee will play ball, they'll slink back into his corner.

[Kucinich4America]

17. Secular conservatives??

Last time I checked, the Republican pie seemed to be sliced up as following.....

The corporatists are backing Mittens. Except for the ones backing Hillary.

The neocons are backing 9u11ani.

The fundies have congealed like the amoebas they don't believe in around Huckabee.

The militia lunatic fringe nutcases are with Ron Paul.

What's left (pardon the pun) of the Republicans after that?

[walldude]

24. Hey you know what? He's right..

I'm really enjoying this :rofl:

[mtnester]

28. Don't worry Unka Karl will come to the rescue..soon

Too early to dump a whisper campaign...wait for it

Mitt is Karl's boy

[Jacobin]

31. Huckleberry will be "Deaned" by the MSM at the appropriate time

There will be a faked "scream" moment or some such.

Corporatists will not allow Huckleberry to be president.

[blindpig]

32. Instead of secular you should call them money conservatives.

They are the core, the old school of the Republican Party. The people who constitute the religious portion of the Republican coalition were Democrats before the cynical, evil genius of the Nixon/Raygun Southern Strategy. After decades of playing along with the Money faction they are flexing their muscle. And look what we get, strip away the religious trappings and Huck's programs are by and large something one would expect from Democrats. This could be a true revolution in American politics.

Follow the money. Corporate money is being redirected from the Republicans to Corporate Democrats. The Money cares not for appelations, only for it's own increase. Any purported leftists who welcomes this is a fool.

An Edwards/Huckabee race would be the Money party's worse nightmare.

[Ganja Ninja]

36. Exactly.

The real money behind the GOP isn't going to support the Huckster. As another poster in this thread has noted. Huck will be "Deaned" by the media at some point.

[blindpig]

34. Check this out:

From the first time I heard Huckabee speak I was overjoyed and have been pulling for him to get the nomination ever since.

The success of the Republican party has depended upon an unlikely alliance between between two groups, big business interests and blue collar people who are tradition-oriented. I don't think they are "values" voters, nor do I think it has much to do with Christianity - "old time religion" is just a stand-in for old time everything. The notion that Cheney is representative of evangelical Christians, or any kind of Christian, is absurd. Bush himself may be the least religious president in recent history. The big money folks, more than happy to get the support of blue collar people by pandering to religious ideas or whatever works, are not interested in the agenda of the religious right. Blue collar people are not interested in supporting big business interests, and if there were the slightest hint that the Democrats were opposed to big business interests I believe there would be a mass defection from the Republican party. But so long as the Democratic party figureheads and spokespeople represent the liberal wing of the ruling class and talk mostly about cultural issues, blue collar people are low hanging fruit for the Republicans.

Keeping that alliance together depended upon not letting either group focus on the other one very much or look too closely at them. Reagan was perfect - he looked like a friend to big business to one group and a friend to blue collar "all's I know is" people to the other group.

The future of the Democratic party depends upon splitting those two groups, and what was needed was someone who truly represented one of the two groups and not the other.

I can't understand why some liberals are flipping out over Huckabee. They need to get out more, I think. Yes, by supporting him blue collar people are not yet voting Democratic, and for some upscale and atheistic liberals he seems to be the antithesis of everything we supposedly stand for, but they are moving and that is good because they are moving away from the alliance that has kept the Republicans in power. That means they are fed up with the alliance, they are seeking and thinking, and they are unraveling 30 years of careful work by the Republicans.

Do we want the Reagan Democrats back? Is it OK if they clomp into our elegant meeting rooms with their muddy boots? Can they keep their "old time religion?" Can they define patriotism differently than we do - as duty to community rather than as allegiance to the rulers - and still be welcome? Can they keep their guns? Their small farms?

We are moving towards the flip flop of the two parties that I have been predicting - Clinton representing big business and the upper class while Huckabee represents populism and the working class.

Huckabee, in the eyes of many conservatives is to the left from Clinton on economics.

Huckabee is the leader of the religious Left - not a member of the religious Right. Like Bob Novak's model, Huckabee may pass the litmus test of social conservatives on abortion, gay marriage and gun control but he's is far removed from the conservative-libertarian model of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.

Finally, a conservative pundit is attacking the campaign of Mike Huckabee.
Bob Novak writes:



Who would respond to criticism from the Club for Growth by calling the conservative, free-market campaign organization the "Club for Greed"? That sounds like Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich or John Edwards, all Democrats preaching the class struggle. In fact, the rejoinder comes from Mike Huckabee, who has broken out of the pack of second-tier Republican presidential candidates to become a serious contender -- definitely in Iowa and perhaps nationally. Huckabee is campaigning as a conservative, but serious Republicans know that he is a high-tax, protectionist, big-government advocate of a strong hand in the Oval Office directing the lives of Americans.




Novak is right. Huckabee is no conservative. He is a big spending, bleeding heart liberal. Sure he may be "socially conservative", but that term is an oxymoron.

In fact, anytime the word social is put in front of the word conservative, just go ahead and cross out the conservative part, because the politician in question surely isn't one. Huckabee is a disaster. In fact he is even less conservative than George Bush, the President who expanded government even more than Lyndon Johnson.

As one of those conservative-libertarian, Goldwater/Reagan types, who also happens to be an evangelical, that truth breaks my heart. Regardless of the way the media covers most church types, they are actually more in line with modern liberalism than conservatism. Most are not really that conservative at all, but part of that group once called Reagan Democrats. If you don't believe me, ask the average Baptist what he or she (especially she) thinks of TennCare? Why do you think we have TennCare in this Bible Belt state?