Mike Huckabee, a former Baptist minister with close ties to anti-gay religious conservative activists, has surged into a virtual tie with front-runner Rudy Giuliani in the Republican presidential race, just two weeks before the first contest, according to a new Reuters/Zogby poll.
Last month, conservative columnist Johah Goldberg wrote in the Los Angeles Times that:
A devout social conservative on issues such as abortion, school prayer, homosexuality and evolution, Huckabee is a populist on economics, a fad-follower on the environment and an all-around do-gooder who believes that the biblical obligation to do "good works" extends to using government-and your tax dollars-to bring us closer to the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth.
As others have already said, the rise of a socially intolerant, big-spending "populist" was always the fear that hovered over small-government, low-tax economic libertarians regarding the Republican party's strategy of aligning religious conservatives with free marketers. The hope was one day to see a socially tolerant (and gay inclusive) economic conservative (someone not too far from Giuliani, perhaps) emerge as the standard-bearer. The nightmare was/is Rev. Mike, the amiable enemy of liberty.
More. Be afraid: Huckabee and the Christian Reconstructionists.
And worse. He raised a son who is a dog torturer. But hey, he's got that old time religion, so let's make him president, say the Republicans of Iowa.
19 Comments for “The Religious Right Strikes Back”
posted by Avee on
So many gay people are campaigning and contributing on behalf of Hillary, Obama or Edwards, as if there were much/any difference in their support for gay rights. And then I think if they instead worked on behalf of Giuliani and cut off Huckabee (or Romney), what a huge difference that would make in the overall struggle for gay equality. Rescuing the GOP from the fundamentalists is a big challenge, but the payoff for advancing gay equality would far exceed the debatable difference of Hillary vs. Obama.
posted by Ashpenaz on
As frequently happens, I am once again torn between hating someone for their politics and wanting to vote for him because I find him SOOOO attractive. I Heart Huckabee for all the wrong reasons.
posted by Hank on
Ahhh Ash, give me John Edwards any day…. And yeah, there is a difference, Avee, between Edwards and Giuliani, in their support for gay rights.
posted by Rhywun on
the rise of a socially intolerant, big-spending “populist” was always the fear that hovered over small-government, low-tax economic libertarians
In other words, it’s 2000 and 2004 all over again. The Republican base loves this stuff but frankly I think America’s over it, after suffering through it for 8 years already. Therefore I think the Democrats are going to steamroll over any Republican that gets nominated.
posted by Randy on
And it’s hardly a surprise that Huckabee is a front runner. The Republicans have been courting the religious right for years, and now they are flexing their muscle. Anyone who has followed the primaries in certain districts would know that the far right and the religious right control the primaries in those districts. They mainstream guys could have tried to temper them, but they didn’t or couldn’t.
And they are surprised about Huckabee? Please…..
posted by Jorge on
But at least he’s amiable.
I really want Giuliani to win, but if there is going to be a president or a nominee beholden to either the crazy left or the crazy right, I want him or her to be a leader with strong convictions of their own that are independent from their supporters, and to be enough of a leader to resist the crazies now and then. President Bush did okay, but then, the three biggest candidates in 2000 moved the party to the left on the gay issue.
The reverse is happening for 2008. Giuliani, Huckabee, and Romney are showing very little backbone for gay rights. I think by now they all at one time said something that must have tweaked the far right, but who is able to say something and it’s believable?
I think Romney and Huckabee have both demonstrated in different ways that they believe in something very important about this country. They agree with the religious right on too many things, but what they want for this country is greater and more important than that. I believe they have the intent and the will to always put the greater good of the country above the desires of divisive politics, no matter who they become beholden to.
(I also think they’d each have plenty of times when it’ll be easy for them to appease the right, and they’ll do it.)
Thompson would be a disaster. He doesn’t have very good leadership. If he won, and because the religious right supported him, he wouldn’t be able to defy them.
posted by Brian Miller on
The real question is, how seriously will gay people take gay issues?
If Huckabee is the GOP standard-bearer, and a typical anti-equality Democrat is the Dem nominee, will gay people (especially gay Republicans) cast their ballots for the pro-gay Libertarian Party candidate — or hold their noses and vote for the ‘phobe?
posted by Avee on
Rhywun: The Republican base loves this stuff but frankly I think America’s over it, after suffering through it for 8 years already. Therefore I think the Democrats are going to steamroll over any Republican that gets nominated.
Could well be. But what if the GOP nominates Huckabee, and the Democrats go with Obama, and it turns out that Americans are somewhat more racist than they were willing to admit to the pollsters — especially when it comes down to electing the big daddy in Washington. Result: a sqeaker victory by Huckabee.
My point is that at least in the primary phase, the top goal of politically concerned LGBTs should be blocking Huckabee and Romney, the most rabidly anti-gay candidates in the GOP field. Giuliani, McCain or even Thompson are much more confortable with gay issues and unconfortable with the hard-core religious rightists (though yes, they have made some limited outreach to them as well).
Then, in the general election, the progressive LGBTers could work for Obama.
posted by Another Steve on
But Avee, some (many?) LGBT progressives actually want the most homophobic candidate to win the GOP nomination — remember the gay Democrats who launched the YouTube attacks on Giuliani a few months ago? They’re betting on keeping “the LGBT community” loyal to Democrats no matter what. It’s a risky strategy that works at well for them if Obama or Hillary actually does win; if the president turns out to be Huchabee or Romney, too bad for the rest of us (but a fund-raising windfall for the LGBT activist groups!).
posted by ETJB on
(1) The Libertarian Party opposes civil rights.
(2) The Libertarian Party has zero chance of being selected President by the Electoral College.
(3) Very littlet has changed with the GOP since the 1970s.
The Religious Right brings out the voters, and then some people in the party try and downplay their importance to appeal to ‘moderate’.
posted by Last Of The Moderate Gays on
There’s enough on the substance side to dislike Huckabee without having to resort to cheap attacks on his family, no matter how repugnant they may be. As much as I pray that Huckabee crashes and burns, I don’t think he “raised a dog torturer” any more than Al Gore “raised a drug addict.”
“Therefore I think the Democrats are going to steamroll over any Republican that gets nominated.”
Not if the Dems do the stupid thing & nominate Hillary.
posted by Marcus on
“I am once again torn between hating someone for their politics and wanting to vote for him because I find him SOOOO attractive. I Heart Huckabee for all the wrong reasons”
Are you mentally disordered?
posted by Avee on
Sorry, “moderate gay,” but how you raise your children is of significance, especially in a case where not only does your son torture a dog, but you use your influence to help him get away with it.
posted by Ashpenaz on
No, I’m not mentally disordered. I like to think of myself as a funnier, unpublished version of David Sedaris. Are you gay? Do you not get droll sarcasm?
In any case, I’m actually voting for Edwards. He’s certainly vote-worthy. But Huckabee is a bit more masculine, with that Cabela’s catalog man thing going on–darn his homophobia!
posted by Geena on
I don’t fear Huckabee so much, in that his political philospohy seems to be:
Huckabee – What would Jesus do?
I fear Romeny in that his politics seem to be :
Romney – What would Jesus say?
and McCain – Thank God for Jesus
Let’s hope Iowa goes 1 – Huckabee, 2 – McCain
New Hampshire then goes to McCain. We’re then done with
Romney. Gulianni manages to pile up enough delegates to give
it to McCain.
Republicans may be still be stuck with a Huckabee VP.
McCain does not like fundamentalists, so at least you’ll have
secular governance if McCain wins.
posted by Brian Miller on
ETJB keeps repeating lies about Libertarians “opposing civil rights,” yet he is a passionate supporter of the Democratic Party — which opposes civil rights.
Odd, that.
posted by iz on
Quite frankly I see the whole Religious Blight as a paper tiger. They can’t even get anyone to take them seriously anymore. You kick in the front door to them and the whole castle falls down. Even you most nutjob religious types don’t even follow them as much.
I’ve dealt with your doomsday religious types and I don’t think they are as serious a threat to the LGBT community as they were 50 years ago. On a personal note, I don’t think the Religious blight is very smart at all. THey have no concept of the real world and I just can’t see how a bunch of senile people on the 700 Club are going to mess with me.
Live Free or Die!
posted by ETJB on
Fact 1: The Libertarian Party opposes all civil rights legislation that regulates the private sector.
Fact 2: I do not recall stating that I am a “passionate supporter” of any particular political party or candidate.
posted by ETJB on
Fact 1: LP platform, “We support repealing any such [civil rights] laws rather than extending them to all individuals.”
Fact 2: LP platform, “While we do not advocate private discrimination, we do not support any laws which attempt to limit or ban it.”
Both planks are from the LP platfom as recently as 2002. Has the party changed its views? No, they have simply made the platform vaguer.