The ProConPundit loves Huckabee...through Iowa

This is a very interesting article that is very harsh toward Huckabee. I tend to agree with a lot of the article though I am not as harsh as Huntley. I think the media and secularists are a tad harsh on Huckabee for wishing people a Merry Christmas. At the same time, I clearly doubt his credentials to be our President at this perilous time in our history. As I have stated often, I believe McCain is the only Republican who has the necessary bona fides.

The ProConPundit REALLY dislikes Romney. I think he is disingenuous and just wrong for our country. I heart Huckabee long enough for him to beat Romney in Iowa. I think McCain is moving toward a New Hampshire win and then we are off to the races. If Romney wins in Iowa, that would hurt McCain in New Hampshire. If the Bible man can pick off Romney in Iowa, I believe the Granite State mavericks will be solidly behind McCain.

Go Huckabee in Iowa!

Huckabee? Is GOP serious?
Republicans need to burst the Huckabubble quickly
Chicago Sun-Times December 18, 2007
BY STEVE HUNTLEY

The only question is when -- not if -- the Huckabubble will burst.

Only a Republican Party hell-bent on political suicide would nominate Mike Huckabee as its standard-bearer in next year's presidential sweepstakes. Or a dispirited party so resigned to defeat that it figured it had nothing to lose in appeasing its evangelical wing by anointing a candidate who resembles Jimmy Carter more than Ronald Reagan.

A Huckabee nomination would all but guarantee the GOP an election debacle of the magnitude of Barry Goldwater's 1964 loss -- but without establishing a foundation for the future as Goldwater's candidacy did. Goldwater's failed presidential bid launched the modern conservative movement that ultimately propelled Reagan into the White House.
But Republicans don't have a death wish. They won't nominate a former Arkansas governor from Hope (the Democrats already did that). And a sure voting-booth catastrophe is only one reason why.

For starters, Huckabee carries religiosity into politics far beyond acceptable boundaries for most traditional Republicans. Like me, they're not hostile to faith. Far from it, most are believers and worship regularly. Though not very religious myself, I am troubled by the push by the secular left to drive God from the public square. Neither a Nativity scene on the village green at Christmas time nor a prayer at the opening of a high school football game seems to me to constitute establishment of a state religion. And our Declaration of Independence and Constitution would be unimaginable without the West's Judeo-Christian heritage.

But Huckabee brazenly campaigns in Iowa as the candidate offering "Christian leadership." How would we feel about a politician touting "Jewish leadership" or "Muslim leadership"? Huckabee is injecting religion into politics to the detriment of both. And he's hitting below the belt by playing an evangelical card against Mitt Romney's Mormonism. Dirty politics from an ordained minister.

Social conservatives energized by Huckabee's bid for the GOP nomination might take note of news reports about how he avoids religion in his campaigning in New Hampshire. Voters there are more fiscally conservative and not swayed by a former preacher glibly joking that Jesus is too smart to run for office.

Pro-Huckabee evangelicals can say what they want about Rudy Giuliani's stance on abortion and gay rights or John McCain's immigration position, but at least they're honest with the voters. They hold firm to the same message no matter what the state is where they're politicking.

We already know from his tax-raising record in Arkansas that Huckabee is no fiscal conservative. His attempt to disguise that boils down to damning the conservative Club for Growth, which blew the whistle on his taxing ways, as the "Club for Greed." That's a taste of what Arkansas media tell us is the unpleasant prickly side of a thin-skinned politician.

Now comes word the National Education Association in New Hampshire endorsed Huckabee for his "strong views on public education." That's teacher-union code for being against school choice. He would abandon the long-held GOP response to the dismal failings of government-monopoly education.

If that wasn't bad enough, Foreign Affairs magazine over the weekend published a Huckabee essay attacking President Bush for an "arrogant bunker mentality." Despite overall low job approval ratings, Bush remains popular with the GOP base. Romney got it right in describing Huckabee's attack as something you'd expect from the Democratic camp, not from a politician seeking to succeed Bush.

Finally, no one thinks Huckabee, even if he wins in Iowa and another early state such as South Carolina, has the organization or money to compete Feb. 5 on Tsunami Tuesday when nearly two dozen states hold primaries. It will take more than enthusiastic evangelicals to sustain the Huckabubble, and fiscal conservatives won't sign on. It's just a question of when it will burst.

Obama shows capacity to heal a hurting nation, Clinton clutching

At last week’s last pre-Iowa caucus debate among Democrats, an otherwise snorefest debate was significant in two ways. Most importantly, when Joe Biden persuasively and concisely debunked previous criticism as racially insensitive for calling Barack Obama "fresh and clean and articulate." Biden is easily the best candidate among Democrats for the presidency. He is the competence candidate and has a reasonable plan for the war in Iraq. He is bipartisan, a team player, and because Democrats vote with infatuation and idealism to the exclusion of victory and pragmatism, he doesn’t stand a stance. Following Biden’s remarks, his colleagues and opponents affirmed/applauded him. Obama went further, as he said to give church testimony, that Biden is a fine guy and his life’s work shows he isn’t a racist. It was a great tribute to Biden. It also showed Obama as one who has a genuine desire and an aptitude for bringing about racial healing which is so much a need in our country.

The other noteworthy event in the debate was when Hillary Clinton used that frightening cackle of hers in an attempt to deliver a gotcha moment to Obama. Joining the recent efforts of her pathological husband and despicable henchmen, she flopped. She was trying to put Obama in an uncomfortable position in response to a question about why he has former Clinton operatives advising him as the agent of change. Obama was unflappable. In a way that he was thoughtful and tough and humorous. It was a moment that could have been JFK to Nixon in 1960. Clinton is desperate. She is a long way from being defeated, but her stock is falling fast, as it should.

Is the ProConPundit endorsing Obama? Not so fast. Consider these three things:

1. The ProConPundit supported McCain in 2000. I voted for McCain in the primary and for Bush in the general election. Given how our world changed on 911, I still submit we would have been better prepared then and better off today had McCain been elected in 2000. I am with him now and, until the South Carolina primary is over, I am not entertaining interest in any other GOP candidate. Imus was correct a year ago when he said that we seldom have chance to elect a great president in America and that McCain offers us such a chance.

2. Biden is the best candidate among the Democrats. Chris Dodd has equal credentials and experience to Biden. Dodd turned his back on long time friend and fellow CT senator, Joe Lieberman. If you mess with Lieberman, you mess with the ProConPundit. Given the dire state of affairs in our country, we need each party to put forth the best they have to offer. Whether you like Bush or not, I think it is fair to say that we have not had a president with superb diplomacy skills since Bush I. The ProConPundit defines best as unifiers, foreign policy and diplomacy experts, and bipartisan. I believe that renders McCain and Biden as the best each party has to offer. The media imposed subway series fight between Giuliani and Hillary that the media says the country is itching for is insane. They are both baggage laden disasters waiting to happen.

3. Back to Obama. His inexperience has been largely touted, including by me. One of the things that prepares one to be president is running for president. He has performed well. Given that he has never been in a serious election before, he became a US Senator beating Alan Keyes, he is making all the right moves. Thanks largely to Chicagoan David Axelrod, his campaign manager.

The Clintons don’t really know how to win against Obama. The only thing they know how to do is lie and cheat and sling mud. Their minions stressing Obama’s middle name, his teenage drug use and kindergarten desire to be president show who they are and what they are about. What does Obama do? He brings out Oprah to talk about unity and the audacity of hope. I respect Oprah’s reply to those, such as me, who say this is not Obama’s time or his turn. She says Rosa Parks would still be on the back of the bus and Oprah would still be working in a television mail room if they had waited for someone else to declare it their turn. Fair enough. I think Obama will be president and should be. I honestly think we need someone of McCain or Biden’s competence and experience in 08. However, since Democrats vote with their libidos and rose colored glasses, I don’t see a Biden victory in the offing and Hillary would be a disaster. So the ProConPundit is growing in enthusiasm for Obama.

Last Democratic to win Vice-Presidency endorses McCain

Mench-in-chief Joe Lieberman endorses John McCain

I hope that got your attention. Joe Lieberman gets a lot of press these days as a conservative. He isn’t one. Check out his voting record. Joe Lieberman is a bona fide liberal, a lifelong Democrat. But something changed him. He won the popular vote in 2000 for the Vice-Presidency. Yes, he was the person in America that Nobel Prize, Inconvenient Truth declaring, Internet inventing Al Gore selected as his running mate. Lieberman was from Connecticut. He couldn’t bring a big state. He didn’t have a national constituency and except for political junkies like me, most people outside the beltway didn’t know who he was. The reason he was chosen was because he was good. He was the one Gore knew could be relied on. Other than marrying Tipper, it may have been the only other good move Gore ever made. How right Gore was–and how little Gore knew just how much Lieberman could be counted on.

Following their popular vote victory/electoral college defeat, no one could have blamed Gore-Lieberman for being Sore-Loserman (remember the bumper stickers?). And that is just exactly what Al Gore has done for eight years. He’s gotten on with his life, done some good, told some tall tales and spent a lot of time bad mouthing the Bush Administration–sometimes justifiably, sometimes ridiculously, always self-serving.

What did Lieberman do? He watched Bush and Cheney at 911 and realized it could have been, would have been, should have been him in the bunker and Gore being flied all over. On the National Day of Prayer in the wake of 911, Lieberman hugged Bush at the National Cathedral, demonstrating unity and empathy and statesmanship.

Whatever you think of the war, Lieberman does not fit into the two categories of fault I understand. One category are people who jumped to war or cherry picked Intel. The other are spineless Democrats who voted in favor of the war even though they were against it. Lieberman honestly believed it was the right thing to do. His consistency in seeing the matter through is based on first hand experiences he has had on the Senate Foreign Relations ommittee and numerous trips to Iraq. He’s had the candor to disagree with the Bush Administration when he needed to, the courage to agree with Bush when saw fit, ran for president against the Bush Administration in 2004 to no avail and was resilient enough to retain his Senate seat in 2006, beating a right winger turned anti-war left winger challenger Ned Lamont and the betrayal of his fair weathered Democratic friends.

For the record, of the current Democratic field for President, Biden is the only one who stuck with Lieberman in 2006. And if you are thinking that Lieberman should have endorsed a Democrat for President in 2008, keep this in mind: not one of them asked for his endorsement. McCain did. Its always nice to be asked.

Lieberman’s endorsement of McCain is a great thing. It may be more symbolic than translating any real value in terms of votes. Lieberman and McCain would each tend to be respected by the New Hampshire brand of independent voters except that those folks also tend to be anti-war.

Lieberman and McCain are both statesman. They have each been betrayed by their own party. That’s because they put country and integrity over partisan loyalty.

Imus is back, the ProConPundit is back, and McCain is on the way.

Having collected a $ 21 million settlement from CBS for firing him for doing what they specifically hired him to do, be outrageous and offensive, Don Imus returned to the airwaves and to RFD-TV on December 3. Following a mild mannered warm up, Imus declared, "Dick Cheney is still a war criminal, Hillary Clinton is still Satan, and Imus is back." Thank God. Its a great show. Imus' great forte is his ability to interview influential people and grill them as no one else does. Welcome back I-man!

Much to the criticism and consternation of some loyal and brilliant blog readers, the ProConPundit felt the need for a break. The political race is just starting to get interesting, so the ProConPundit thought it was time for a comeback.

And Sen. John McCain is on his way back. He has racked up endorsements of the DesMoines Register, the Boston Globe, and the New Hampshire Union Leader. Check out this list of other McCain endorsements: http://www.johnmccain.com/supporters/.