John Hawkins at Right Wing News has?posted a pretty thorough roundup of the blemishes in Rudy’s past social views.
The problem is that Giuliani’s platform in the 2008 primary race will differ significantly from when he was running for Mayor of NYC in the late 1980′s.
Just like Mitt?Romney- (“I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.” and?”…regardless of one’s beliefs about choice, you would hope it would be safe and legal.”); or George Allen- (“abortion should be illegal when the fetus is viable, with or without life support” and “[abortion should be legal]??when pregnancy resulted from rape or incest, when the life of the woman is endangered, and gross fetal abnormality.”) which would keep 98% of all abortions legal.
Even John McCain, who has a fairly strong Pro-Life voting record, assured an assembled group of San Francisco?newspaper editors that overturning Roe v. Wade would not be a priority in his administration.
And with apologies to Race 4 2008 reader Debbie Watson, even?Condi Rice has described herself as “reluctantly Pro-Choice”.
So who does that leave us in the 2008 field? Newt, Huckabee, and?Brownback. Does?Hawkins really believe that these are the only candidates who have a shot at the Republican nomination?
Every candidate will move to the right on a myriad of issues leading up to 2008. Rudy Giuliani included.
This issue was discussed in greater depth in a previous essay “Addressing the Abortion Meme” found here.??
August 31st, 2006 at 1:16 pm
It is true that the GOP will never nominate a candidate who supports abortion-as-birth control. Much less a candidate who is pro-gay and anti-second ammendment. Of the field with acceptable credentials, only Mike Huckabee has the ability to keep the South united and win the elction. We’re content to sit back and watch while America comes to this sane conclusion as they get to know Mike Huckabee. Look how far he’s come in the last year without even actually running.
BSR
August 31st, 2006 at 1:48 pm
I like Mike BSR!
The scenario I have laid out for Huckabee to win the GOP nom is: #1 McCain is “Liebermanned” in the primaries, #2 Rudy’s past social views and Romney’s Religion (as well as his past history of liberal social views) proving to be an insurmountable hurdle, and #3 George Allen implodes.
#3 has already happened and I believe #1 will happen eventually.
That leaves #2 BSR; and that is where we’ll have fun debating for the next 17 months!
BTW R4’08 readers, check out BSR‘s awesome blog, Mike Huckabee President 2008, if you haven’t done so already.
August 31st, 2006 at 2:27 pm
Kavon: Shouldn’t you just turn this blog into a Pro-Rudy blog and stop trying to masquerade it as being impartial or objective in any sense of the word? 95% of all the posts around here have one overlying theme: “Rudy is the best!” Don’t you think there’s a little conflict of interest going on here?
August 31st, 2006 at 3:09 pm
With regards to the abortion issue, the candidates can pretty much lump into three groups.
#1 — prolife actions, prolife rhetoric: Huckabee, Brownback, Newt
#2 — prolife actions, mixed rhetoric: Romney, McCain
#3 — prochoice all the way baby: Giuliani
Comparing Giuliani to Romney and McCain on this issue isn’t accurate, since both Romney and McCain can point to their records. Also, Romney is one of the few candidates advocating for RvW to be overturned, whereas Giuliani is currently in favor of partial birth abortions.
August 31st, 2006 at 3:13 pm
How on Earth is the Huckster going to get past the small-government and anti-tax-hike wing of the GOP? The social conservatives do not call all the shots, they might have to take their 2nd favorite candidate who doesn’t tick off all the libertarians.
Not to mention Huckabee’s pea-sized fundraising abilities…
August 31st, 2006 at 4:13 pm
Huckabee can raise the money, but it takes time and he has just started, unlike the rest of the
crowd, he is not independently wealthy (which also can help him in the general). As far as the
small government and anti-tax people I think you should wuit reading the Club for Growth and the
Arkansas Times propaganda. Huckabee spearheaded the largest tax cut in state history and also
introduced legislation that would streamline state government by consolidating the over 300 boards and agencies
to 10. This was shot down by the democratically controlled legislature. The government increases you are refering to might have something to do with the mandated services that have to be provided and the mandated resources required to provide them. Huckabee is not your typical leader, he does what has to be done and he does what is right regarless of the way the wind is blowing.
August 31st, 2006 at 5:02 pm
James,
If Huckabee spearheaded the largest tax cut in state history, tried to streamline government, etc, why is the Club for Growth practically burning him in effigy on a weekly basis? If he’s not a big-government tax-hiking etc etc, what did he do to tick them off? Run over their dog? Can you provide any links to his record?
August 31st, 2006 at 10:02 pm
I can answer that, Murphy. The Club for Growth is focused on fiscal issues to the exclusion of all else. Their views on government spending are simply not practical in a functioning society. Governor Huckabee is functional pragmatist on fiscal issues. He is fiscally conservative, in other words, but not at the expense of the most vulnerable people in our society. The Club for Growth, in its dogged persuit of its mission, would happily cut Medicaid to the bone, eliminate federally supported health insurance programs for children of the working poor, and defend the rights of corporations charging $450 for sheets of plywood after hurricanes. Mike Huckabee will not toe their line. Which raises an interesting question. Other candidates also do not toe this line as The club for Growth would like, so why the focus on Huckabee? I’ll tell you why: They know how strong a candidate he’s going to be. You quite rightly point out that the social conservatives do not call all the shots. But that is true also of the fiscal conservatives. I believe Mike Huckabee will be adored by the social conservatives, and acceptable to enough fiscal conservatives to get the job done. Who else can say that? Certainly not Romney or Giuliani.
BSR
September 1st, 2006 at 1:38 am
BSR,
Yes, I can see where you’re coming from. Romney would likely be the other side of the coin from Huck. Adored by the fiscal conservatives, acceptable to the social conservatives.
September 1st, 2006 at 12:20 pm
Also, you should mention that Huckabee has never been a fan of the Club for Growth and it has been taken personal by the heads of the organization. Club for Growth is not the voice that Huckabee will listen to, he listens
to the voice of the people he serves. I think that you can look at his record and see that.
Interest groups are not pulling the strings with this guy. He has some that support him that he has never bee
an advocate.
September 2nd, 2006 at 1:37 am
As a libertarian conservative, color me skeptical on Huckabee for now. Here’s one comment posted on another blog that pretty much sums it up. “My main problem with Huckabee is he reminds me way too much of GWB at about this time 8 years ago.” In 2000, Bush was Mr. Compassionate Conservative. Bush maintains any favorable reputation now solely because of his leadership in the war. Huckabee doesn’t have that. Rudy Giuliani locked up the criminals and threw out the porn shops. Huckabee pardoned a criminal that even Clinton refused to pardon, and that criminal went out and struck again (read it on the Wikipedia). If the general public got wind of that from the media it’d make Rudy’s social issues look like the pope’s own. Even the Republican primary voters will forgive social liberalism to an extent. They, nor the general public, will forgive percieved softness in a time of war.
That, and I’m rather skeptical of the benefit of compassionate conservatism as understood currently by the Republicans. It was supposed to promote practical solutions to classic Democrat talking points like welfare. Steal their thunder, so to speak. All well and good – but as approval ratings of the current congress prove, it hasn’t exactly lived up to its name. Deficit spending is out of control, and believe it or not it’s not all going to the war.
Maybe Huckabee can really deliver on its agenda. His record shows that he at least tries. However, I’m not confident that his approach is the one conservatives should be going after. Rudy Giuliani pushed welfare and education reform, and has about the most commonsense immigration ideas you can imagine. All while cutting the waste from the city government and keeping the law and order agenda running well. That, I like. I’m not convinced that Huckabee really understands how to promote true reform and its end goals, rather than how to look like a “compassionate conservative” to supporters with a list of pet projects. It’s the difference between acknowledging that market forces in general work and that government should be primarily interested in ameliorating their sharp turns to ensure things are well and stable here in the states, and believing in government intervention programs for the sake of them. Or, the difference between those who advocate cutting free trade for its strong transformative (and often disruptive) role in the US economy, versus those who advocate free trade and that progress with appropriate and well-designed education programs to help those on the trailing end, particularily the working class, adjust to the shock. I’m a free market pragmatist and prefer candidates of the same bent. Pragmatist (or attempt at one) I see in Huckabee, but free market (or fiscal conservative for that matter) I am not sold on quite yet. I’ll be watching him, though I don’t expect my thoughts to change much. If he wants to be a compassionate conservative reformer, I’d like to see him move to stand out as one, not just make the noises of one.
Frankly, his support for an increased minimum wage and certain health flags him out for scrutiny by the fiscal conservatives. It’s not that we don’t dispute the political or economic necessity of actually keeping a minimum wage around for the near future, or that health care is a serious issue that is at least worthy of serious consideration by the nation. It’s just that those are things you usually hear from populist morons ala John Edwards. He needs to make a conservative case for compassionate programs and implement them as a conservative would. Otherwise, he’s going to look like a tax-and-spend liberal who tosses money and resources at problems without a goal or results. I think if he can argue his case and his past record well, he can sideline a good deal of criticism and skepticism. As surely as Rudy needs to consider the social conservative wing of the party, Huckabee had better not forget the fiscal conservatives. He also needs to come to terms with the war in his thoughts for the campaign, as he doesn’t get the national defense card like Rudy does. He’s got his work cut out for him, but I’m interested to see if he will generate more of a solid campaign, or at least ideas to savor ala Rudy or Newt.