Post by: Paddy on December 15, 2007, 07:26:37 AM
Huckabee Sees WH 'Bunker Mentality'
Dec 14, 9:12 PM (ET)
By LIBBY QUAID
(AP) Actor Chuck Norris, left, with Republican Presidential hopeful, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee,...
Full Image
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - 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."
In one specific criticism, Huckabee said Bush did not send enough troops to invade Iraq. And he accused the president of marginalizing Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff, who said at the outset of the war that it might take several hundred thousand U.S. troops to control Iraq after the invasion. "I would have met with Shinseki privately and carefully weighed his advice," Huckabee said.
He said this year's troop increase under Bush has resulted in significant but tenuous gains, and he said - much as Bush has - that he would not withdraw troops from Iraq any faster than Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander there, recommends. The military has now slowly begun to reverse the troop increase.
Huckabee has previously joked about his lack of experience in international affairs. "I may not be the expert as some people on foreign policy, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night," he said earlier this month.
While the Foreign Affairs article is missing the one-liners he is known for, it does have a few folksy comparisons to illustrate his points. On Iran, for example, he makes a case for diplomacy by saying, "Before we put boots on the ground elsewhere, we had better have wingtips there first."
He adds that the U.S. can exploit the Iranian government's hunger for regional clout, saying, "We cannot live with al-Qaida, but we might be able to live with a contained Iran."
Last week, Huckabee missed a report the White House released saying Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program; one day later, the candidate said he was unaware of the report and had been campaigning too hard to read the newspaper or be briefed. The Foreign Affairs article seems to have been written before the report was released, citing "urgent concerns about Iran's development of nuclear weapons."
In his article, Huckabee also thumped Bush for failing to pursue al-Qaida in Pakistan, noting recent terrorism plans, since thwarted, that were planned there: "Whereas our failure to tackle Iran seems to be leading inexorably to our attacking it, our failure to tackle al-Qaida in Pakistan seems to be leading inexorably to its attacking us again."
Earlier Friday, on another topic in Boscawen, N.H., Huckabee said eliminating federal income taxes in favor of a national sales tax would help save Social Security - an odd pitch in a state where residents pay no state income or sales taxes.
"Instead of basing our national budget off of payroll taxes for Social Security ... it means the base of funding is much broader," said Huckabee, whose shoestring campaign has surged nationally and in Iowa, which holds caucuses five days before New Hampshire's Jan. 8 primary.
The tax plan Huckabee has proposed, called the "FAIR tax," would eliminate federal income and investment taxes and replace them with a 23 percent federal sales tax. Even the backers of the tax admit it is unlikely to get through Congress, and other leading GOP candidates have been critical of the idea.
It's a tough sell in New Hampshire, where residents do not pay state income taxes or general sales taxes. Scott Sweezey, a programmer at the plant where Huckabee spoke, said he doesn't know how to make a consumption tax treat people fairly.
"Low-income or retired would pay the same tax as somebody who has a million dollars," said Sweezey, an independent. "I guess if you don't buy anything, you don't pay any sales tax, but if you do buy something, you pay sales tax."
Separately, Huckabee also named Republican political strategist Ed Rollins as his national campaign chairman. Rollins was national campaign director for Ronald Reagan in the 1984 presidential election.
http://apnews.myway.com/image/20071214/Huckabee_2008.sff_CON104_20071214155600.html?date=20071215&docid=D8THJH880
Post by: MechAg94 on December 15, 2007, 10:03:40 AM
I guess I am not sure how he would change his foreign policy. I got the impression Bush has been throwing money at and working with any country that would work with us. I am not sure how sending troops into Pakistan would help things there. I agree that area is a problem.
At least he admits we can't just yank the troops out immediately.
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 15, 2007, 10:41:55 AM
If that's what it takes to appeal to disaffected Republicans like Riley, though, we grown-ups might have to endure it.
Post by: Finch on December 15, 2007, 11:14:26 AM
At least he admits we can't just yank the troops out immediately.
That's just the problem. We can "yank the troops out immediately". We've done it before in wars we should have never been it and none of the fearmonger prophecies came true.
Post by: Len Budney on December 15, 2007, 11:52:41 AM
We've done it before in wars we should have never been it and none of the fearmonger prophecies came true.
Dude, you are SOOOOOO wrong! Look at Vietnam! They predicted that Asia would fall to communism like a string of dominoes, and soon we'd be the only free country left in the world. And we DID pull out of Vietnam, and it DID... um... waitaminnit...
--Len.
Post by: Sergeant Bob on December 15, 2007, 04:59:36 PM
It seems all I hear from Huckabee is this kind of demagoguery. Take common criticism of Republican person/group X, and repeat it as if you were saying something profound. "Ooh, he's really givin' them what-for!" If that's what it takes to appeal to disaffected Republicans like Riley, though, we grown-ups might have to endure it.
If that's what it takes to appeal to disaffected Republicans like Riley, though, we grown-ups might have to endure it. Well said fistful of wisdom. He's just using the popular anti Bush rhetoric in an attempt to boost his ratings. I thought only the Democrat candidates were running against Bush this election.
We've done it before in wars we should have never been it and none of the fearmonger prophecies came true.
Dude, you are SOOOOOO wrong! Look at Vietnam! They predicted that Asia would fall to communism like a string of dominoes, and soon we'd be the only free country left in the world. And we DID pull out of Vietnam, and it DID... um... waitaminnit...
--Len.
Well, umm, South Vietnam actually did fall to communism. As to whether the "Domino Theory" was correct or not, thats what was believed at the time.
Post by: Len Budney on December 15, 2007, 05:16:47 PM
Well, umm, South Vietnam actually did fall to communism.
Sure. And The Powers That Be swore that they'd have kept their noses out of it if it weren't for the danger a communist South Vietnam posed to the US.
Quote
As to whether the "Domino Theory" was correct or not, thats what was believed at the time.
Just like it was "believed at the time" that Saddam had the bomb. Just like it's "believed" now that Iran has a nuclear program. "Believed at the time" isn't an excuse for unleashing mass death. If I "believe at the time" that Jews use the blood of Christian babies to bake their passover matzo, would that justify my unleashing a pogrom in the local Jewish neighborhood?
The whole point is to learn from experience that the political class should be greeted with serious skepticism whenever they tout an "imminent threat." Especially when they use the "threat" to justify an invasion, a total obligation in the trillions, and the suspension of basic civil rights like habeas corpus. It's asinine to greet it with, "Well, Bush means well, even if he is wrong."
--Len.
Post by: MechAg94 on December 15, 2007, 05:59:47 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 15, 2007, 06:00:07 PM
Well said fistful of wisdom. He's just using the popular anti Bush rhetoric in an attempt to boost his ratings.
Thanks. I heard him doing something similar with the anti-Religious-Right angst.
I don't think the Republicans need to run against Bush, but they DO need to distance themselves from a lot of what he has done. But "go-it-alone arrogance"? That is such tired drivel.
Post by: wooderson on December 15, 2007, 06:02:02 PM
Quote
His attempts to work with Dems
hehe
Post by: Len Budney on December 15, 2007, 06:04:02 PM
We never did pull out of Asia as we have kept troops in Korea. Not sure if you count Japan as Asia. South Vietnam did fall and so did a few other countries. Nice how you conveniently define the argument so you can say you are right.
If the entirety of Asia went communist, it would still pose us no danger. A bunch of freaking busybodies want to control the lives of little yellow people thousands of miles away, and they offer obviously false justifications while ignoring the equally obvious immorality of their actions. It's a disgusting display of hubris.
And yes, we need to pull out of Korea and Okinawa as well. We've inflicted enough needless suffering on them.
--Len.
Post by: MechAg94 on December 15, 2007, 06:08:35 PM
Post by: MechAg94 on December 15, 2007, 06:09:50 PM
Quote
His attempts to work with Dems
hehe
Post by: wooderson on December 15, 2007, 06:13:45 PM
Post by: Len Budney on December 15, 2007, 06:14:21 PM
One of my co-workers served in Korea. We just had a visit to our plant that was from the Korean subsidiary. I don't think either one would agree with you that they are suffering...
We denied them democracy for four decades. If your friends think that's OK, then I don't need to say what I think of his opinions.
--Len.
Post by: MechAg94 on December 15, 2007, 06:31:10 PM
No, no, regale us with tales of compromise rejected! On which issues and proposals did Bush make a good faith effort to accommodate Democratic desires where he was soundly rejected and ridiculed?
His education bill in the first term. A lot of Republicans were pretty upset with that one. And let me say that I really do appreciate your arrogant and condescending attitude in your post. It really demonstrates matchless character.
Post by: MechAg94 on December 15, 2007, 06:38:33 PM
One of my co-workers served in Korea. We just had a visit to our plant that was from the Korean subsidiary. I don't think either one would agree with you that they are suffering...
We denied them democracy for four decades. If your friends think that's OK, then I don't need to say what I think of his opinions.
--Len.
Post by: Manedwolf on December 15, 2007, 06:39:10 PM
I just enjoyed some Korean-made ginger tea that was packaged in high-tech multilayer foil retorts inside a box with professionally designed graphics, along with ISO certifications, standards of purity and such on it. It was like the opposite of a Chinese package.
South Korea's Daewoo is one of the world's largest, most diversified companies, making everything from guns to microchips to supertankers and container ships well over a thousand feet long. Your computer likely has some Daewoo chips in it, and it was probably shipped to the US on a Daewoo cargo vessel.
North Korea has famine and firing squads.
Yeah, we're really making them "suffer"...
Post by: wooderson on December 15, 2007, 06:56:51 PM
Quote
His education bill in the first term. A lot of Republicans were pretty upset with that one.
An education bill that was primarily attacked by Democrats because it was underfunded and tied into a vouchers scheme. And, of course, the modified bill was ultimately passed with overwhelming support from the opposition party.
This, by any measure, does not meet your claim that Bush 'tried to compromise' and was met with rejection and ridicule.
Post by: MechAg94 on December 15, 2007, 07:03:41 PM
Quote
This, by any measure, does not meet your claim that Bush 'tried to compromise' and was met with rejection and ridicule.
That was your measuring stick, not mine. Obviously, you have a much different view of the matter.
Post by: wooderson on December 15, 2007, 07:22:20 PM
"His attempts to work with Dems [...] encourage[d] more attacks from Dems."
Post by: Len Budney on December 15, 2007, 07:29:45 PM
One of my co-workers served in Korea. We just had a visit to our plant that was from the Korean subsidiary. I don't think either one would agree with you that they are suffering...
We denied them democracy for four decades. If your friends think that's OK, then I don't need to say what I think of his opinions.
Denied? Too bad North Korea has yet to even have a chance at it.
What the hell kind of answer is that? We propped up brutal regimes in South Korea, squashed pro-democracy elements in the country, and your answer is that things were also bad in North Korea? We can repress democracy all we want, as long as someone else represses it more?
The fun I can have applying that kind of "logic"! "It's OK to do X, as long as Y does even more X." So:
* I can molest children, as long as I molest fewer than Arthur Schwartzmiller.
* I can rape women, as long as I rape fewer women than Mongezi Jingxela
* I can kill Jews, as long as I kill fewer Jews than Hitler.
Sigh.
--Len.
Post by: wooderson on December 15, 2007, 07:44:56 PM
Heh.
Post by: K Frame on December 15, 2007, 08:32:46 PM
Can I have some of what you're smoking?
It must be REALLY good *expletive deleted*it in order for it to generate fantasies like that...
Post by: wooderson on December 15, 2007, 09:03:46 PM
If the latter, do you not believe that US support for various juntas kept democracy on the sidelines? Do you not believe that the US could have initiated democratic movement by withdrawing support for said juntas?
Post by: Waitone on December 16, 2007, 01:33:48 AM
Classic, just freakin' classic.
--Huckabee hires an honest to goodness hardball campaign director in the person of Ed Rollins
--Last week democrats express no worry over Huckabee as a candidate because he could be offed with no sweat. I believe the term was "glass jaw" and they were just itchin' to bust him.
--Friday of last week news breaks conveniently as it appears that Huckabee was something less than forthcoming and factually accurate in his claim of a degree in theology; a claim he used throughout his political career and certainly during this election season. http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59222
Some people would say he lied . . . . if they were paying attention to the news late on Friday AND
--They weren't getting all worked up over his slam against Bush foreign policy that appeared the same day.
So here we have a triple play in the game of politics. A>Huckabee gets his evident lying out on the record and no one seems to notice, B>a democratic haymaker is counterpunched, and C>Huckabee gets to separate himself from policies of the past.
In one play we have a mis-direction, preemption, and a red herring. Absolutely brilliant political management on the part of Rollins. If Rollins can pull off these plays in the first week as quarterback, imagine what he will do with a little preparation and time. This could be great sport if Rollins keeps it up.
For me? Huckabee just did something highly unsanitary in his mess kit. Deceit is not a trait I look for in professing Christians who want to be entrusted with high office. I regarded him as suspect because of the political swamp out of which he crawled. He's no longer suspect in my eyes. He's simply unqualified.
Post by: Len Budney on December 16, 2007, 02:48:03 AM
"We denied them democracy for four decades."
Can I have some of what you're smoking?
Can I have some of what you're smoking?
It's not surprising that you don't know the history--most American's don't. But I mentioned this before, you responded as above, and I cited the history, all in a recent thread. How soon we forget.
The US supported puppet dictator Syngman Rhee until he fled Korea in 1960 with lynch mobs at his heels. When the people attempted to replace him with a democratically elected leader, the US supported General Park Chung Hee's coup. When he was assassinated in 1979, the US supported the takeover of Major General Chun Doo Hwan. Korea finally achieved democracy, no thanks to the US, in 1987.
EDIT: You've made it clear that answering your personal jibe about the "Budneyverse" would be pointless. However, the history is abundantly clear. We supported dictators in the ruthless suppression of pro-democracy elements. There's no way to put a good spin on that without resorting to fallacies like tu quoque (e.g., Mech's defense that at least it wasn't as bad as North Korea), or racism (any sort of insinuation that the little yellow beggars "weren't ready" for democracy), or flat-out imperialism (a South Korean democracy was contrary to our interests, so we suppressed it). What you can't deny is that we helped suppress it from the start of our intervention through 1987.
--Len.
Post by: K Frame on December 16, 2007, 05:58:04 AM
Or, at least the "history" as it's defined in the Budneyverse, where outcome is the sole arbiter of history. Antecedent events have absolutely no relevance. How silly of me to forget something like that.
I have to admit, though, that that sort of sloppy take on history is appealing to many, as it removes any sort of necessity to think, assimilate, or interpret, and is an easy path for those whose ultimate goal of "The United States is evil."
Now, this thread is about Mike Huckabee.
Any further posts that are off topic will be immediately deleted.
Post by: Paddy on December 16, 2007, 07:02:53 AM
Quote
A>Huckabee gets his evident lying out on the record and no one seems to notice,
Huckabee said (during a debate):
"I'm as strong on terror as anybody. In fact I think I'm stronger than most people because I truly understand the nature of the war that we are in with Islamofascism. These are people that want to kill us. It's a theocratic war. And I don't know if anybody fully understands that. I'm the only guy on that stage with a theology degree. I think I understand it really well."
He later explained:
"I have a bachelor of arts in religion and a minor in communications in my undergraduate work. And then I have 46 hours on a master's degree at Southwestern Theology Seminary. So, my degree as a theological degree is at the college level and then 46 hours toward a masters -- three years of study of New Testament Greek, and then the rest of it, all in Seminary was theological studies, but my degree was actually in religion."
So to you, a degree in theology and a degree in religion are vastly different; it's clear Huckabee purposefully intended to mislead everyone about his credentials because a degree in religion in no way qualifies him to 'understand the nature of the theocratic war with Islamofascism the way a degree in theology would, and you're just so indignant about it you could spit when you say:
Quote
For me? Huckabee just did something highly unsanitary in his mess kit. Deceit is not a trait I look for in professing Christians who want to be entrusted with high office. I regarded him as suspect because of the political swamp out of which he crawled. He's no longer suspect in my eyes. He's simply unqualified.
Like you know the difference between the two disciplines, religion v theology anyway?
Gimme a freakin' break. Your remarks are intellectually dishonest, ruin your credibility, and make you sound like a partisan Democrat.
Post by: Len Budney on December 16, 2007, 07:12:51 AM
So to you, a degree in theology and a degree in religion are vastly different... and you're just so indignant about it you could spit...
You have a point. Although we both know they're different, his defense will probably pass with most people. I still think it was deceptive, but he can make a case that he simply "could have put it better."
But his clarification made his debate point even more risible than it was before. The suggestion that some college-course pabulum about Islam, together with philosophical blatherings about man's basic sinfulness, makes him uniquely qualified to deal with terrorists was already laughable in the extreme. When he clarifies that he's studied Greek and a few comparative religion courses, it's even more obvious how retarded his claim was. "Leave Bin Ladin to MEEE! I can speak GREEEEAK!"
Which connects up with Huckabee's efforts to free serial rapists and such. It's obvious that his religious background makes him less suited for dealing with criminals and other threats: his brand of theology is apparently gullible to claimed repentance. If Bin Ladin were to claim he "found Jesus," apparently Huckabee would have him over to the White House picnic to sing Kumbaya together. Especially considering that Clinton labeled him a "terrorist" and made a half-assed attempt to bomb him. He's obviously just another victim of the Clinton machine.
--Len.
Post by: Paddy on December 16, 2007, 11:50:11 AM
It seems all I hear from Huckabee is this kind of demagoguery. Take common criticism of Republican person/group X, and repeat it as if you were saying something profound. "Ooh, he's really givin' them what-for!" If that's what it takes to appeal to disaffected Republicans like Riley, though, we grown-ups might have to endure it.
If that's what it takes to appeal to disaffected Republicans like Riley, though, we grown-ups might have to endure it. It's hardly 'demagoguery' when the majority of the country completely disapproves of Bush and his foreign policy. That's why it's 'common criticism' as you point out in the second sentence.
And, if you've been paying attention, the Democrats are all running against Bush, which is stupid, considering he won't be on the ticket in '08. Huckabee essentially cuts them off at the legs with pre-emptive (you do like 'pre-emptive', right?
) criticism of GWB. So it's a smart political move, too.BTW, I'm not a Republican anymore. I used to be (since 1968). No longer.
Post by: Paddy on December 16, 2007, 11:51:52 AM
So to you, a degree in theology and a degree in religion are vastly different... and you're just so indignant about it you could spit...
You have a point. Although we both know they're different, his defense will probably pass with most people. I still think it was deceptive, but he can make a case that he simply "could have put it better."
But his clarification made his debate point even more risible than it was before. The suggestion that some college-course pabulum about Islam, together with philosophical blatherings about man's basic sinfulness, makes him uniquely qualified to deal with terrorists was already laughable in the extreme. When he clarifies that he's studied Greek and a few comparative religion courses, it's even more obvious how retarded his claim was. "Leave Bin Ladin to MEEE! I can speak GREEEEAK!"
Which connects up with Huckabee's efforts to free serial rapists and such. It's obvious that his religious background makes him less suited for dealing with criminals and other threats: his brand of theology is apparently gullible to claimed repentance. If Bin Ladin were to claim he "found Jesus," apparently Huckabee would have him over to the White House picnic to sing Kumbaya together. Especially considering that Clinton labeled him a "terrorist" and made a half-assed attempt to bomb him. He's obviously just another victim of the Clinton machine.
--Len.
Yada yada. Even if all that were true, the bottom line is that Huckabee wouldn't have done any worse than Bush.
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 17, 2007, 12:41:51 AM
It's hardly 'demagoguery' when the majority of the country completely disapproves of Bush and his foreign policy. That's why it's 'common criticism' as you point out in the second sentence.
Do you know what "demagoguery" means? He was repeating silly things that people want to hear, for political gain. Of course it's "a smart political move." Demagoguery usually is.
Quote
BTW, I'm not a Republican anymore. I used to be (since 1968). No longer.
Which you've said a thousand times. Sorry; I'll add the "former" next time. BTW, are you voting next year?