Letters to the Editor
-
Mike Huckabee, Statist.
In my view Mike Huckabee stands in the Republican ranks as the closest candidate philosophically to the current President. A large-government "conservative", Mike seems to care less about learning and evaluating policy options than governing with whatever convictions he might bring to the table. Sound familiar?
What we see now in the Republican party is a shift towards statist execution of philosophical objectives, away from the libertarianism that was once at least a component of some party discourse. In Huckabee's world, the power of the state would be used to force a shift in social policy domestically while spreading America's "values" through force on the foreign front. It's odd to think that so few see a problem with this as Huckabee continues to rise in poll popularity.
-
Mike Huckabee, Bush 2.0?
So Huckabee knows nothing about the Middle East. His supporters won't care--they know even less. Maybe his ignorance will dissuade him from getting involved in the Middle East. I wish it'd dissuaded Bush.
Unfortunately, Bush's follies have made basic knowledge of the Middle East (or at least a sincere desire to learn a lot, fast) more important than ever.
Huckabee is definitely running as the big-government, compassionate conservative Bush ran as in 2000 (as Anonymous notes), but I don't see how this means he wants to be a Bush-style global interventionist.
In any event, Huckabee's comments display a hilariously, ignorantly, scary outlook on the Middle East:
There are a lot of options that involve other territory that doesn't have to include the West Bank or the Golan Heights. There is an enormous amount of land in Arab control all over the Middle East.
Uh, don't worry, folks, plenty of Arab land to go around? And one piece of land is just as good as any other? It's all ancestral holy land! Are you friggin' kidding me? Yowzah!
-
never complain about mike huckabee
instead, consider the genuine creeps that have slithered out of the republican woodwork.
if you must have an elected king, you are now in the fortunate position of 'every choice is an improvement on current position.' huckabee is the perfect choice for republicans: ignorant, opinionated, religious, and charming. quite like king george the w, really, but nicer and not warped by a lifetime as the runt of the family.
for a nation that brags continually about it's 'democracy', surely it finally time to put aside your current mimicry of georgian britain, and support gravel's ideas on real democracy.
-
Weak historical grasp?
The only person who has demonstrated his weak and biased view of history is Walter Shapiro. The partisan reporter wrote,
"If only Huckabee had a grasp of foreign policy to match his monopoly on puckishness. Instead, his answers to basic questions about the latest Israeli-Palestinian peace talks were troubling in their cheerful know-nothing-ness. Huckabee displayed his roots as a Baptist minister when he said with shaky historical grasp, 'This conflict isn't new. It has been going on since all the way to the time of Abraham.'"
This is a completely historical and accurate statement. The Muslims themselves accede, if not push, this view of the religious conflict between the descendants of Ishmael (Muslims) and Isaac (Jews). In fact, they re-interpret the text of the akeida, the binding of Isaac, as the binding of Ishmael to supplant the Jews as Abraham's inheritors. It is from this crucible that many believe the Muslim / Jewish conflict arose. To say that it started in 1948 belies even the secularists' view of Muslim Jewish hatred which even they would portend starts with Mohammed in 640AD.
The only person here who lacks a telescopic and nuanced view of history is the vapid reporter himself who deigns to critique someone when he, himself, knows nothing.
To cap off Mr. Shapiro's lackluster reporting, he wrote
"What was even more startling was when Huckabee appeared to reject long-standing Clinton-Bush policy and oppose a Palestinian state that would include portions of the West Bank. 'It would be very problematic for Israel to give up the West Bank, from their own standpoint of security,' Huckabee said. Instead, the surging Republican long shot suggested, "there are a lot of options that involve other territory that doesn't have to include the West Bank or the Golan Heights. There is an enormous amount of land in Arab control all over the Middle East.' Left unclear amid this prattle about an 'enormous amount of land in Arab control' was whether Huckabee was nominating the Sunni Triangle in Iraq as the new Palestinian homeland."
The governor didn't make any claims as to where the Arabs in the so-called West Bank should live. He may have been referring to Gaza, the historical "homeland" of the ancient Philistines who were wiped out by the Romans 2000 years ago.
No matter.... Mr. Shapiro clearly has his own point of view and has decided to inject his own invective into the governor's innocent remarks. The Arabs control thousands and thousands of miles of land. The governor is claiming that the tiny state of Israel shouldn't be forced to make decisions with existential consequences when the Arabs have so much land, no strong cultural or religious ties to the Jewish land, and plenty of ways to end the conflict tomorrow if they so wished to do so. The reality on the ground is clear to the governor. The only thing clear to Mr. Shapiro is that vapid liberal dogma, like appeasement, is the solution to all ills. Anyone who dares to offer views contrary to this are religious nuts who engage in wild-eyed prattle.
Mr. Shapiro would do well to remember that liberal used to mean reading and digesting multiple points of view before coming to any hard or fast conclusions. It seems that his liberalism, like those of some of his illustrious Salon contributors, is nothing more than neo-liberalism, a reactionary and closed-minded version of that practiced by his mentors and idols.
-
Trudeau should pick up on this pundit!
Bravo! Brilliant! Wannabe Huchabee has a myopic grasp of history. We'll always have problems, but would any of them regarding territories in the mid-East exist, if back in the 40s the settling of victims of WWII were settled elsewhere as was urged back then? The ramifications of such speculation are inexhaustable and meaningless. Not a cop-out but Doris Day had it right when she sang about the status quo.