Tag: Romney

Why Evangelicals Support Huckabee over Romney

~ fundyreformed ~ 23 Comments

No. It’s not because Romney’s Mormon and Huckabee’s Baptist. I contend Huckabee’s evangelical support goes deeper than that. The roots of his support are grounded in concepts the political punditry and main-stream media can’t seem to comprehend.

Evangelicals are a multi-faceted bunch. We are controlled by a Scriptural, and highly moral ethic. And politics is just a side-focus to us. We’re mainly about the Gospel and Jesus, and so political ties are held somewhat tenuously. It’s not enough to just slap “pro-life” on your chest, evangelicals do care about the whole package that comes with that.

I recently stumbled across a post by Josh Reighley which sums up this point very well:

Huckabee’s primary support has come from Evangelical Christians. In the past, we have voted for candidates based on one or two issues. Knowing this, the Republican party has outright pandered to us on these two issues, and earned a lot of support. We care about a lot more issues, and the Republican party largely ignores them.

There is a biblical mandate to protect life. The GOP attempts to do this, but they tend to do it in a cold and heartless way, causing the country to look at the proponents of life as theocratic tyrants.

There is also a biblical mandate to protect the poor. There is a biblical mandate to be good stewards of the environment. There is a biblical mandate to fight greed and corruption. These are part of the true evangelical heart.

He goes on to claim that Romney is a “plastic candidate” blatantly pandering to Evangelicals based on his pro-life and pro-family stance. I totally agree. Josh goes on to explain just why Huckabee appeals so much to us Evangelicals.

We don’t have to choose from the lesser of two evils. We have a very articulate, warm hearted evangelical who cares about the same things that we care about and doesn’t have to pander to anybody. He cares about the environment. He cares about the poor. He is not beholden to corporate interests or to political interests. He knows the struggles of the everyday American family, and he wants to make their life better.

This is why I and others I know support Huckabee. And this train of thought is why several prominent Christian bloggers do as well: Justin Taylor, Matthew Anderson, Joe Carter — (see joint endorsement here) and Randy Alcorn.

Alcorn in particular illustrates the Biblical mindset that favors a candidate like Huckabee:

Today, I am less enthusiastic about political parties than I’ve ever been. I’m a Republican largely because I adamantly oppose abortion. But my concern for the poor, racial justice and the environment””all of which have a strong biblical basis””make me sometimes identify more with the concerns of Democrats (though I don’t always agree on their proposed solutions). But I could never be a Democrat as long as that party remains hostile toward the rights of unborn children. Yes, there are prolife Democrats, but they are a small minority. And by the way, if I had a choice between voting for a prolife Democrat and a prochoice Republican, I’d vote for the Democrat in a heartbeat….

In my opinion, Huckabee doesn’t just know the words; he knows the music. You can see the authenticity in him. I heard him say, “I do not spell G-O-D G.O.P.” That means he’s a follower of Christ before he’s a follower of the Republican party. He’s not overbearing in his spiritual beliefs, but he never apologizes for them. He’s humble and self-effacing. He’s not in your face, yet he’s firm in conviction. I actually think this guy says what he believes and believes what he says. And I have to say, I don’t think that about most politicians. He says some things that are unpopular and will lose him votes and he says them anyway””I love the courage that reflects….

And evangelicals shouldn’t be afraid to support Huckabee. The political pundits are wrong: Huckabee is McCain’s toughest competition–and Romney is just siphoning votes away from him. (You’ve got to read Joe Carter’s excellent post on pundit-based reality vs. voter-based reality.)

Personally, I’d much rather cast a vote for McCain than for Romney– because McCain at least has integrity and is honorable. So chalk me up for one who wouldn’t mind a McCain-Huckabee ticket. I just wish Huckabee was on the top of that ticket!

Bonus: for an explanation of why I think Romney is untrustworthy, check this older post, or Joe Carter’s recent one here.

Huckabee's Great Night, and Mine

~ fundyreformed ~ 4 Comments

Huckabee’s Night

Mike Huckabee surprised a lot of people, including me. The polls showed him declining in the south, with either McCain or Romney taking those states from him. Instead he won Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, Arkansas, and also West Virginia (full results here). He came within a few thousand votes of taking Missouri, and was a close second in Oklahoma.

Sadly, McCain won almost all the delegates in California, took all of Missouri’s winner-take-all count, and added other populous states to his delegate totals. Mathematically, it’s almost impossible for either Huckabee or Romney to win now [HT: Racefor2008]. Huckabee’s best chance is for the party to rally around him instead of Romney as the conservative alternative to McCain. And in truth, Huckabee is more viable than Romney at this point, with Romney’s failure to win in the south and Romney’s failure to win primaries.

I’m suspecting a McCain-Huckabee ticket will eventually emerge. That might be enough to rally all wings of the party around the nominatee. Regardless, Huckabee’s message is getting out and that’s a good thing. Servant leadership, the FAIR tax, standing up against corporate greed — these and other planks of his message are very important for the Republican establishment to hear. I hope the Republican party changes for the better as a result of this election cycle.

My Night

Now Huckabee had a great night, and I had an interesting one. I went to my first caucus and discovered firsthand how important one voice can be.

First of all, I saw firsthand how incredible the voter turnout was. At my caucusing center, we had 3 times the number they expected, and probably more. Still, my precinct and ward (St Paul, Precinct 3, ward 6) only had 5 people attending. I live in St. Paul, in a largely democratic area. At the caucusing center, though, there was at least 100-150 people.

A local Christian high school was volunteering, and had their students read off letters from the candidates. But when it came time for Huckabee’s letter, there wasn’t one. Apparently the other candidates had just emailed letters in, and Huckabee’s campaign didn’t. But because I was there, with the letter in my hand, I was able to read it in front of everyone in my half of the center (we had to split into 2 rooms).

It was rewarding to be able to ensure Huckabee’s message was heard, and I was excited to hear Huckabee do quite well in our room. There was no clear leader, but it seemed McCain and Huckabee did best, followed by Romney and Paul.

I am now one of the delegates going to our house district convention (HD66A), and I and my fellow delegate from my particular precinct/ward will both be casting votes for Huckabee.

I thought the caucus system was great, and it gives people an opportunity to be involved. I am now the chair for our small little precinct, and was able to get a resolution passed for our state party platform to consider needed judicial reform.

I had a fun night, even though it was my daughter’s 2nd birthday, and I rushed home after the caucus to finish the celebration with birthday cake. I encourage everyone to keep supporting Huckabee, and in the process to learn more about how to be involved in local politics. We have a right and responsibility to be involved. And one person can make a difference.

Don't Waver on Your Vote for Huckabee

~ fundyreformed ~ 6 Comments

Huckabee won the first state of this Super Tuesday. West Virginia gave its 18 delegates to him.**

He upset heavily favored Romney to do so, and that may be a harbinger of things to come later tonight.

Romney, and his supporters have everywhere trumpeted the notion that a vote for Huckabee is a vote for McCain. Someone recently claimed this on one of my old posts. But that is not the truth.

Huckabee is not splitting the conservative vote between himself and Romney. The facts, from polling data, are that a majority of Huckabee supporters would actually go with McCain over Romney. I’d probably find myself in that category, even though I have serious reservations with McCain.

Plus Huckabee is only getting 24% of the Republicans who attend church regularly — only 1 point better than Romney. And both of them are getting a smaller support than McCain. [For proof see this post citing recent USA/Gallop polling numbers.]

So a vote for Huckabee is really a vote for Huckabee. It actually helps prevent a landslide McCain victory. That may not be preventable after today, we shall see. But today, you’ve got to get out and vote for Huckabee!

**Note while McCain’s supporters helped in Huckabee’s WV win, the rules of WV’s convention required a majority support for 1 candidate. It’s just simple politics, that’s all. No backhanded deal between Huckabee and McCain, like Romney’s insinuating.

Mitt Romney: A Smooth, Fast-Talking Politician

~ fundyreformed ~ 10 Comments

Okay, I have to vent here about Romney. From the get go, he’s struck me as smooth, fast-talking and the quintessential politician. He says what we want to hear, and he says different things to please different groups of people. I’m sure there is more to him than this, and I’d probably even vote for him if he won the nomination, but my suspicions endure.

Before I air out the dirty laundry here, let me make one thing clear. Huckabee is not my choice because I’m a fundamental Christian. Videos like this one, make me cringe. America is not the Christian land the Bible speaks of. We are wrong to spiritualize politics and I disliked Bush’s many attempts to do just that.

Huckabee, in my view, doesn’t do this. He takes his faith and its morals and applies them to big issues like poverty, health and education. He aims to do what is right, but he isn’t out trying to spiritualize America as the last Christian nation on earth. He may use Biblical tales as metaphors and figures of speech, but he is not trying to win America for the hard Religious right. (They don’t even support him fully.) Sure he is pro-life, and he is a former pastor. But with 10 years of gubernatorial experience, and a record of accomplishing important things in a highly democratic state, Huckabee’s record proves that he aims to bring America up, not into the grips of one particular ideology.

Okay back to Romney. You’re ready to hear me say “flip-flop” right? And Romney supporters roll their eyes.

But wait, let me stress, I welcome conversions to pro-life views and other conservative positions. I genuinely give Romney some benefit of the doubt. But upon looking more closely at other issues, it becomes clear that this conversion may well be a little too politically motivated.

Convenient Exaggerations

In the news recently, Romney has taken flack for claiming to have seen his father march with Martin Luther King, when in fact the evidence strongly points to the contrary. Worse, Romney then tried to spin his former clear statements into literary devices quibbling over the definition of the word “saw” (in Clintonesque fashion).

This reminds us of Romney’s past statements that he was a lifelong hunter, which turned out to be false. And his more recent claim that the NRA endorsed him as a candidate for Governor, when in fact they didn’t.

Converted to the Pro-Life Cause, Or Not?

In light of these convenient mistakes — convenient in that the statements scored points for him at the time, even though they were doubtful in veracity — this excerpt from a Washington Post blog entitled “Mitt Romney’s Flip Flop Flip” should alarm you.

Romney announced his conversion to “pro-life” views in an editorial in the Boston Globe on July 25, 2005, the day after vetoing a bill expanding access to the so-called “morning after” pill, which required that it be made available to rape victims….

That was not the end of the story, however. The controversy over “emergency contraception” continued to haunt Romney. In October 2005, another bill came to his desk, seeking a federal waiver to expand the number of Massachusetts citizens eligible for family planning services, including the “morning after” pill. Romney signed that bill over the objections of his new anti-abortion allies. On this occasion, he was applauded by “pro-choice” advocates.

The issue came up yet again in December 2005. After weeks of agonizing, Romney instructed all hospitals in the state to comply with the terms of the emergency contraception law, and make the morning-after pill available to rape victims. He acted on the advice of his legal counsel, over the objections of half a dozen Catholic hospitals, which had previously refused to provide emergency contraception on the grounds that it conflicted with their religious views.

“Flip,flop,flip,” editorialized the Boston Herald, on December 9, 2005. “Yes, Gov. Mitt Romney has now executed an Olympic-caliber double flip-flop with a gold medal-performance twist-and-a-half on the issue of emergency contraception.”

This raised my eyebrows because it shows that Romney was flip-flopping on the pro-life issue even before he was seriously running for president. And it should cause even more concern in light of his recent and repeated claims that on every bill that came across his desk concerning abortion, he came down firmly on the side of life. “Abortion” maybe, but “pro life issues” not necessarily, or so it seems.

Yet even on abortion, there is cause for concern. On the campaign trail, Romney has repeatedly traced his conversion to a November 2004 meeting with a doctor regarding stem cell embryos. But this ABC News article points out that:

Within two months of his epiphany on this issue, Romney appointed to a judgeship a Democrat who was an avowed supporter of abortion rights.

Notice this wasn’t a “bill” so Romney may be technically correct, yet this is not what a genuinely pro-life governor does. And to add another twist to that story, the doctor involved has publicly disputed Romney’s version of the facts.

Other Flip-Flops

Hold onto your seat, because there are even more evidences of flip-flopping for good ol’ Mitt.

On Reagan

  • In 1994, when running for political office in liberal Massachussetts, he said: “I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.” — Boston Herald — 10/27/94
  • Now when running for the Republican presidential nomination, he says: “Ronald Reagan is … my hero. … I believe that our party’s ascendancy began with Ronald Reagan’s brand of visionary and courageous leadership.” — Boston Globe — 1/19/07 [HT: Politics & Christianity, drawing from this source, I believe.]

 

On His Desire to Serve in Vietnam

  • “I was not planning on signing up for the military. It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam…” — Boston Herald, 5/2/94
  • “I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam.” — Boston Globe, 6/24/07 [HT: Politics & Christianity, drawing from this source, I believe.]

 

On SCHIP

  • Romney helped expand the federal State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) in Massachusetts by signing a state health care plan depending on SCHIP in 2006.
  • In September 2007, Mitt Romney said he would veto expansions to SCHIP, which Congress passed and President Bush promised to veto. [HT: Politics & Christianity. See also this article for documentation.]

 

Other instances could be given, but many of those could properly be credited to legitimate growing and changing his mind. But all in all, when you add all of this up, the picture becomes fairly convincing that Romney is all talk. Especially when you consider his underhanded (our outright dishonest) campaigning.

So, there you have it. Romney’s Mormonism in no way prejudices me against him. The above mentioned history of political pandering does. And his record on judicial nominations seals the deal.

Religious Bigotry? Mike Huckabee, Mormonism and The New York Times

~ fundyreformed ~ 43 Comments

I hope most Republicans have learned by now that the New York Times and fair journalism are polar opposites. So when the Times takes one short statement out of an 8000 word interview, ignores the context and makes it into a big issue, you’d think Republicans (at least) would know enough to pass this off as leftist bias. Unfortunately that isn’t the case.

Okay then, here’s the scoop. Huckabee was being primed by a reporter to give his judgments on Mormonism and Romney. Huckabee (as he has consistently done in the past), was loathe to comment. He doesn’t think Romney’s Mormonism disqualifies him from the presidency, or that it should be an issue at all. So the reporter, who is also an expert in comparative religion, was pressing the issue. Huckabee at one point thought the reporter knew more about Mormonism than he did, and he innocently asked a clarifying question: “Don’t Mormons believe Jesus and the Devil are brothers?” The original reporter, in the context of his story, explained the question was neutral.

Not so the New York Times. They have read into that statement all kinds of malice. And this is yet another Huckabee attack in the media.

For what it’s worth, Huckabee apologized to Romney, and explained the situation at length in this video, this one, and this one. But perhaps the best response to this uproar is an excellent post by Steven Nielson entitled “I’m no expert on Hinduism, but Don’t Hindus worship cows?” His post is well worth the read, even if you (like me), could care less about yet another New York Times hack job.