Friday, December 28, 2007

The Dumbest Thing I've Read Today

Mike Huckabee has an interesting take indeed on what should be done in the aftermath of Benazir Bhutto's assassination. This is from the NYT:

“We ought to have an immediate, very clear monitoring of our borders and particularly to make sure if there’s any unusual activity of Pakistanis coming into the country.”

On Friday, in Pella, Iowa, he expanded on those remarks.

“When I say single them out I am making the observation that we have more Pakistani illegals coming across our border than all other nationalities except those immediately south of the border,” he told reporters in Pella. “And in light of what is happening in Pakistan it ought to give us pause as to why are so many illegals coming across these borders.”

In fact, far more illegal immigrants come from the Philippines, Korea, China and Vietnam, according to recent estimates from the Department of Homeland Security.

---

“The fact is that the immigration issue is not so much about people coming to pick lettuce or make beds, it’s about someone coming with a shoulder-fired missile,” he said.

Wow. Where do I start? Almost leaves you speechless it's so crazy.

He's using Bhutto's assassination as justification to build a wall on our border with Mexico - absolutely nuts. Ridiculously irrational.

This is THE typical reaction that some sort of grassroots conservative charismatic leader might have. It plays upon all of the fears, insecurities, and international ignorance of the vote base he seeks. I would very much like to see Barack Obama destroy Mr. Huckabee in a landslide next November.

We're all waiting with baited breath for Mitthew Romney's pathetic attempt to outflank these Huckabee comments from an even more irrational right-wing mindset.

3 comments:

jeffrey said...

I read this story this morning in the WSJ and thought, "Yikes! What a nut!" But then I turned on C-Span and watched Huckabee brilliantly schmooze his way through a town meeting in Iowa and thought... wait a minute, this guy is a nut but he sure is a smooth nut.

I think he's got something if he can survive the nominating process... which won't be easy since he's clearly not getting much help in the press... not that he deserves any.

But notice how both that NYT story and the WSJ blurb I read this morning are quick to correct his factual inaccuracy right there in the text of the story.

Sure, you would think this is a standard journalistic practice but it isn't always that way if the candidate has the paper's favor.

E said...

Can you imagine what would happen to local political coverage if the T-P even knew how to correct factual inaccuracies?

Go watch clips of Huckabee on the Colbert Report. I think there's one from like last february or something. His charisma, his comfort level on camera is really something to behold. The Republicans want this in one of their candidates. His religious credentials are merely convenient. He could hold the same political views as Giuliani and be just as effective in winning over votes.

Why?

Republican voters see the Democratic side, they see guys like Obama and Edwards, they're charisma, the ways in which those candidacies, especially, represent fledgling social movements. Barack Obama has been a cultural phenomenon. Even the "second tier" candidates like Biden and Dodd are extremely charismatic and appealing. Republican voters see this. They see the excitement over the personalities and the promises for nondescript things like "change."

Huckabee is the conservative grassroots answer to this. They realize that to even be competitive in November, they'll need someone capable of a movement-like following. They can see the inherent personal hate-ability of gremlins like Romney and Giuliani just like we can.


If not for the current McCain boomlet and the renewed concerns on foreign policy in the aftermath of the Bhutto assassination, I'd be increasingly confident in guaranteeing Huckabee's win in the nomination battle.

carmen said...

They're all charismatics at that level of politics. Fundraisers are essentially caucuses for the rich; you don't get money behind you if you can't charm them. The problem for folks like Biden and Dodd is their charisma doesn't translate via print, secondhand quotations, or even television as well as some others. But Huckabee is easily countered by running more of his pre-weight loss clips. Sad to say, a "pretty" president (as far as the choices go, we're not talking Hollywood standards but Karl Rove-like tastes) makes a better picture, and you'll note both candidates and their spouses have to shape down to make that better tv image. The tine that Huck will balloon out again is a tidy visual.

It's much more likely GOP elements are letting Huck take the spotlight because they have no intention of allowing him as much as veep, that darned flat tax being a huge no-no on the Republican side. After all, Huck makes the flip-flopping Romney look good to the religious nuts. He'll take the radicals and the ones skeeved off with go with number two.