Mike Huckabee on Nationalization of Oil

May 27, 2008

Mike Huckabee has some good commentary on a recent comment by Democrat Maxine Waters.

Here is what he had to say:

Just when you think the Democrats can’t get anymore outrageous, they do. Maxine Waters, a very liberal Democrat, from California wants to nationalize the oil companies. She made the threat at a House hearing on Thursday, May 22. Oil executives were testifying before a House Committee, when Ms. Waters first demanded that oil executives guarantee the American people lower gas prices in return for the right to drill for oil, anywhere the oil companies wanted to.

When the CEOs told her that if Congress would do their job and open up some of the areas that would produce significant amounts of oil, lower prices would follow, Congresswoman Waters responded by saying “well, I can see that this Congresswoman is going to favor nationalizing the oil companies, and making sure the prices go down.”

I guess someone should remind the Congresswoman of Hugo Chavez and . Surely, she isn’t suggesting that. But then, again, maybe she is. She obviously has never learned about the fundamental economic fact of supply and demand.

We all realize that we must do something to help the American consumer, and stem the rising cost of gasoline, but nationalizing the oil companies is not the answer!! must become less dependent on foreign oil. Drilling for oil in areas such as oil rich areas of Alaska, and off the coast of some of our Gulf States should be encouraged in a way that will protect the environment. We can solve our energy problems effectively and efficiently without resorting to the radical tactics of people like Maxine Waters.


Standing Athwart Huckabee, Yelling Stop

January 23, 2008

By George Neumayr
Published 1/9/2008

Against an immutable standard of conservatism, Mike Huckabee is hardly impeccable. I find some of what he says silly and unpersuasive (for example, his support for Global Warming theory). But the explosion of snide remarks directed at him from many in the conservative movement strikes me as churlish and baldly hypocritical. How is it that the bar of conservative entry for a presidential nominee lowers for the Romneys and McCains, then rises for the Huckabees?

Okay, he is a heterodox Republican on some issues. So what? Who isn’t amongst the leading contenders in this primary race? A few years back I recall these anti-Huckabee purists lecturing California conservatives on the need to support Arnold Schwarzenegger over Tom McClintock. Now that McCain has won in New Hampshire, we will soon see this very flexible definition of GOP conservatism resurface and be told that electability trumps all.

Much of the contempt for Huckabee is confusing, alternating between descriptions of him as a socialist pansy and social reactionary. Which is it? Is he too liberal for the GOP or too conservative?

I suspect that the essential problem for some in the conservative movement (as it was for establishment conservatives pitted against Pat Buchanan in his race with Bob Dole in 1996) isn’t that Huckabee takes this or that heterodox position on issues of economics/trade/foreign policy; it is that he’s a transparent Christian conservative. That they just can’t abide, even as some of these pundits tell conservatives to ignore religion with respect to Mormonism.

Romney attended Planned Parenthood events, used to support state financing of abortion and elements of the homosexual agenda; McCain has derided in the past the Religious Right and taken any number of fashionable liberal stances. But all of this can be quickly excused. Woe to the Christian Republican, however, who talks about the culture war, or — brace yourself — rejects Darwinism.

Whatever one thinks of that highly technical debate, that the Wall Street Journal and GOP consultants like Mike Murphy set up adherence to Darwinism as a litmus test for an “acceptable” Republican nominee exposes the degree to which political correctness has crept into the conservative movement. I don’t blame rank-and-file conservatives for increasingly ignoring the snobbish sniffings of the George Wills.

Who cares what they think? How conservative are they? What new liberal social innovation won’t they soft-pedal? A “conservatism” that involves a lot of pretentious throat-clearing and maybe the recitation of a classical tag or two before coming to some PC conclusion (that feminism is a net-gain for society, that Darwin had it right, that gay civil unions aren’t such a big deal, take your pick) isn’t worth much.

Run for the hills, Huckabee talked about Christ during Christmas! Well, good for him. One of the reasons for our flailing in the global war against the jihadists is that we have become de-Christianized cowards. Does America need not one but two wholly secularized parties?

HUCKABEE IS A Christian socialist, some say. Really? If he is a Christian socialist, he is surely the first one to call for the abolition of the Internal Revenue Service. Again, it is not at all clear why rank-and-file conservatives are supposed to nod vigorously whenever a McCain or Romney supporter calls Huckabee an “economic liberal.” At least he talks about eliminating income taxes and capital gains taxes. Do they?

Romney’s support for semi-socialized health care in Massachusetts (which is almost indistinguishable from Obama’s scheme for the entire nation) is scarier to me than anything Huckabee uncorked in Arkansas. And then there is John McCain’s opposition to Bush’s tax cuts. Does that make him an unacceptable economic liberal?

But Huckabee doesn’t talk about Wall Street enough, some warn. Good; Wall Street already sups at the government trough. If he cuts off corporate welfare, I would be happy. It is about time somebody talks about getting the ravenous, regulatory Leviathan state off the backs of small businessmen, gun owners, and homeschooling families, rather than waste time on Wall Street talking to fat cats who vote for the Dems anyways.

But won’t Huckabee shatter the conservative coalition? That would be a little more persuasive if those saying this hadn’t shattered it themselves. The relative success of Ron Paul and Huckabee is not a cause of the coalition’s collapse but a reflection of it. An excessively Wilsonian foreign policy has divided defense conservatives; years of big spending has divided economic conservatives; and a tepid, stalling social conservatism has alienated moral ones.

Perhaps Huckabee can’t rebuild this coalition. But he isn’t likely to weaken it any more than have his critics, and he may even bring some long-disenchanted middle Americans into it.

George Neumayr is editor of Catholic World Report and press critic for California Political Review.

Note from Laura: This guy doesn’t even agree with Huckabee, and it’s perhaps the most fair and honest analysis of his campaign that I’ve seen. If this doesn’t energize you again, I don’t know what will!


Crunch Time

January 3, 2008

It’s the big day. I was driving around town, running a few errands this morning, and I was listening to talk radio. It was interesting to hear some of the hosts say that Iowa is not really that important and is not representative of the rest of the country.

I honestly don’t know if the talking heads are right or wrong, but it seems that part of the reason they are dismissing Iowa is because of Mike Huckabee’s position in the polls. Huckabee has very few allies in the conservative media and they would like nothing better than to see Huckabee lose or to diminish the importance of a victory.

All of the polls suggest that Iowa is too close to call. Huckabee fell some in the polls these last two weeks because of a broadside of attack ads that Romney sent his direction. However, the latest polls this week show that Huckabee has been able to bob and weave around Romney’s punches and has regained a slight lead.

Granted, I’m not putting much stock in the polls. It is all about who can turn out the vote. Romney has superior organization, but Huckabee has supporters who appear to be a lot more motivated. One thing is for sure, it will probably be close and it will be interesting to see how Huckabee and Romney handle their final position after the votes are tallied.

These next few weeks will make or break most of the candidates. Huckabee needs to make strong showings, increase his support base, and increase his fundraising so that he can take the campaign national. Iowa will play a large role in giving him the momentum necessary to do those things.


Huckabee Moves Ahead in RCP Polling

December 7, 2007

Real Clear Politics, a group that averages together the polling data of a number of different sources, now has Huckabee pulling ahead of Romney by more than five percentage points in Iowa. (link)

New Newsweek poll in Iowa (Dec 5-6) that shows among likely GOP voters, Mike Huckabee has taken a commanding two-to-one lead over Mitt Romney:

Republicans
Huckabee 39 (+33 vs. last poll Sept 26-27)
Romney 17 (-8)
Thompson 10 (-6)
Giuliani 9 (-6)
Paul 8 (+6)
McCain 6 (-1)
Undecided 8 (-13)

With the addition of this poll, Huckabee’s lead pops to 5.2% in the RCP Average in Iowa.

I have been very cautious about jumping up and down with joy at poll number, but now I am comfortable with it because I know it is not just an isolated polling phenomena. Huckabee obviously has a lot of strength in Iowa, the question now is if he and his supporters can translate that into nationwide primary victories.

 


Huckabee Tied with Rudy for First in Rasmussen Poll

December 4, 2007

I have often said that Huckabee supporters should always take daily tracking polls with a grain of salt because they can change so quickly. While I still hold to that, this is worth mentioning because it is a milestone for the Huckabee campaign.

Excerpt:

With less than a month to go before the Iowa caucuses, the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that Rudy Giuliani has fallen back in the pack in the race for the Republican Presidential Nomination. Giuliani’s support has fallen to 18% and four other candidates are within six percentage points of the lead. Mike Huckabee is enjoying an amazing surge and now shares the top spot with Giuliani at 18%.

Read the full story here. (link)


Huckabee Wins Oklahoma Straw Poll

December 3, 2007

It appears that Huckmania is spreading. According to the Tulsa World (link), Mike Huckabee won a recent straw poll in Oklahoma with 26% of the vote. Romney came in a close second with 23% and Thompson rounded out the top three with 20%.

As an Oklahoma resident, I believe that Huckabee has the perfect message for the state. Huckabee’s pledge to close the border to curb illegal immigration will resonate with Oklahomans who have recently passed tough laws against illegals. His stance on increasing arts education in public schools will resonate with a school system that needs improvement. His pro-homeschooling ideas will motivate the large numbers of home schooling families in the state to vote for him. These families are usually heavily involved in the community and in churches and will bring a lot of friends and family to the polls with them. His history as a hunter and gun owner will appeal to the large rural population of Oklahoma.

As you can tell, from someone who has lived in Oklahoma, I believe Huckabee is the perfect candidate for the state to support. Hopefully he can find enough time in his schedule to spend a day or two making a whirlwind tour of the state. If he does that, he should be able to count on Oklahoma as a Super Tuesday victory.


Huckabee Rising in Blue New Hampshire

December 3, 2007

The latest Ramussen poll (link) puts Huckabee at his highest point yet in the heavily democratic state of New Hampshire. He is currently polling at 14% in a virtual tie for second with Rudy and McCain. Romney still maintains a comfortable lead there (34%), but the fact that Huckabee is rising shows that he can compete in states that may be more moderate.

One of the criticisms of Huckabee is that he only appeals to uber-conservative evangelical voters. The polls tell a different story. His rising numbers in red states as well as blue states prove that he can appeal to the more moderate voters in the Republican party, and also to independents who tend to be more moderate as well.

People had all but dismissed Huckabee in New Hampshire. It now appears that Huckabee could at least come in a strong second and that would be a resounding victory for him in a strongly democratic state.