The one Republican candidate the Democrats won't criticize is Mike Huckabee. They figure if they keep quiet, maybe the GOP will be dumb enough to nominate the lying, thieving, statist tax-and-spender. Huckabee continues to earn the Democrats' confidence every day, now by bashing the Bush White House, as Libby Quaid reports for the Associated Press:
Mike Huckabee, who has joked about his lack of foreign policy experience, is criticizing the Bush administration's efforts, denouncing a go-it-alone "arrogant bunker mentality" and questioning decisions on Iraq.Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor now running for the Republican presidential nomination, lays out a policy plan that is long on optimism but short on details in the January-February issue of the journal Foreign Affairs, which is published by the Council on Foreign Relations. A copy of his article was released Friday.
"American foreign policy needs to change its tone and attitude, open up, and reach out," Huckabee said. "The Bush administration's arrogant bunker mentality has been counterproductive at home and abroad. My administration will recognize that the United States' main fight today does not pit us against the world but pits the world against the terrorists."
Read the rest at the link above. Huckabee goes on to praise Shinseki, who claimed we would need 400-500,000 troops on the ground to conquer Iraq, a plan only a moron could advance. Even with the successful surge in full force, we only have about one-third the numbers Shinseki advised. IF we could have put that many boots on the ground - and we certainly could not have - it would merely have dramatically increased American casualties by presenting the terrorists a "target-rich environment."
Now, it was nonsense when Shinseki said it, but to recommend listening to him now, after we know what was actually needed, only underscores Huckabee's inability to get a grip on foreign affairs. Go back to Dogpatch, Mike.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
2008 Presidential Race, Huckabee, Primaries, Republican
Tags: Huckabee, presidential campaign, primaries, Republicans
Comments (6)
Huck was my 2nd to last cho... (Below threshold)1. Posted by ReadyFirst | December 15, 2007 5:21 PM | Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Huck was my 2nd to last choice after Paul in this candidate field and this latest stunt only solidifies my opinion. I think he would be a disaster for the party. Despite George Bush's mistakes in this WOT he doesn't deserve to be thrown under the bus by a second rate Gov. from Arkansas for some cheap political points. I get that enough from Democrats. Rudy's not perfect with a few of his positions but he's certainly the pick of this litter.
1. Posted by ReadyFirst | December 15, 2007 5:21 PM |
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Posted on December 15, 2007 17:21
2. Posted by ReadyFirst | December 15, 2007 5:31 PM | Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
BTW, part of the reason we had a large insurgent problem to begin with is that Turkey refused us an avenue of attack from the North allowing for a pincher movement. This allowed lots of men and materials to cross borders at Syria and Iran. Bottom line, we couldn't get troops in much quicker that we did. What were we going to do with 400,000 of them? Shinseki deserved to be ignored. This was not a Fulda Gap scenario. On the other extreme was Rumsfeld who wanted the light footprint which wasn't smart either for an occupation scenario. Sigh, thank God we're doing it right now!
2. Posted by ReadyFirst | December 15, 2007 5:31 PM |
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Posted on December 15, 2007 17:31
3. Posted by Jim Addison | December 15, 2007 5:45 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Rumsfeld's problem was he refused to countenance any side-step from his plan to reorganize the armed forces. His program was an excellent and necessary idea for a peacetime military with limited resources, but simply could not fit the requirements on the ground in Iraq. He was the perfect SecDef to reform the military, but the wrong man to prosecute a war and occupation.
Shinseki's "plan" was impossible, so it amounted to saying we could never invade Iraq. If that is Huckabee's view, then he should come out and say so.
3. Posted by Jim Addison | December 15, 2007 5:45 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on December 15, 2007 17:45
4. Posted by Alan Orfi | December 16, 2007 9:41 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Mr. Addison, I am sorry that Mike Huckabee's success has caused you so much grief, but your constant whining has reached a fever pitch now that you are accusing him of "lying" and "thieving". When you break out big words such as these, it is quite common to actually try to back them up with some facts. In lieu of such facts, is there any chance you could explain to us just what this man has done to you personally to justify your theatrics?
Please just calm down a bit and read Mr. Huckabee's latest foreign policy statement. Yes, we all love George Bush, but the Iraq war was not executed to perfection. If you could just open the mind a bit, you will see Mr. Huckabee has a very reasonable and legitimate plan to wage our war on Islamofacism.
Finally, for your edification, please simply accept the fact that your little tirades do NOT adversely affect the political campaigns of candidates who are genuine and authentic. No, I am not advocating that all of Mr. Huckabee's positions are spot-on conservative, but this man has certainly touched a lot of people through the simple art of communication. He is the best articulator of facts on our side since Ronald Reagan. Yes, the Great Communicator himself. I understand that you have entrenched yourself in some idea that Mike Huckabee is a liberal or, in your own words, a liar and thief. If you have become so disjointed to actually believe that, then there is nothing more to say. I can only hope you will open your eyes and see that Mike Huckabee can and will defeat Hillary Clinton next November. I hope you possess the ethical fortitude to let go of whatever Republican candidates' balls you've been swinging from and knock off all this nonsense. Mike Huckabee is going to win the Republican nomination because folks in the media simply do not possess the influence they think they do. I really wish, however, that you conserve some of your energy for the general election campaign because Mr. Huckabee will need all the help he can get.
4. Posted by Alan Orfi | December 16, 2007 9:41 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on December 16, 2007 21:41
5. Posted by Mark Dias | December 16, 2007 10:37 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
I can't agree more. I just hope conservatives wake up to find out who Huckabee really is. I just posted about Huckabee on my site
Mark
http://mark24609.blogspot.com/
5. Posted by Mark Dias | December 16, 2007 10:37 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on December 16, 2007 22:37
6. Posted by ke_future | December 17, 2007 1:14 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
hey alan,
i *have* looked at huck's foreign policy statements. this guy shouldn't be allowed within veiwing distance of the white house.
as far as i can tell, the only things huck is conservative about are social issues. well, let me tell you something, i'm more concerned with fiscal policy, national security policy, and foreign policy than i am with who is doing what in the back room as long as they are all consenting adults.
huck's fiscal history, and his policy statements, his lack of experience or coherence on foreign policy, and lack of any national security policy that i can find pretty much puts him right above ron paul on my list of republican candidates.
oh, and it's the media who want huck to win. if he does win the republican nomination, it won't be in spite of the media.
6. Posted by ke_future | December 17, 2007 1:14 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on December 17, 2007 13:14