Romney vs. Huckabee

On September 3rd, 2008 at 3:13 am, ritwingr said:

ITookTheRedPill,

I was a Fred Thompson guy, with no real reason to dislike Huckabee. I disagreed with him on Global Warming and borders, but had no real animus toward him. I must admit, though, that I really did aquire a disdain for him as the race went on for one reason only: his persistent belittling of Mitt Romney.

Again, I was NOT a Romney guy, but Huckabee’s ongoing vendetta really made him seem like a petulant guy to me.

Maybe you can enlighten, what, exactly does he have against Romney? Did Romney once steal a girfriend of his or something? Seriously, it was obviously very personal and I never saw Romney – who seems like a quite decent, if boring, guy – reciprocate.

I was a Fred Thompson guy initially, too.  I’m ashamed to admit that I didn’t start paying attention to this Presidential race until late December 2007.  Fred was my initial preference because he seemed like the most conservative guy running, and one media soundbite of Huckabee (saying that President Bush’s foreign policy could be considered “arrogant”) made me angry that Huckabee was going along with what I consider a Democrat[ic Socialist] Party talking point.

When Fred dropped out, I started looking at other candidates.  I hadn’t made a firm decision by Super Tuesday, but Huckabee and Romney were both high on my list. 

Late on Super Tuesday, Romney promised to battle “all the way to the convention”.

Less than 48 hours later, after making that promise, Romney quit at CPAC, with the lamest excuse I have ever heard for quitting a political race:

“Frankly, in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror”

I knew in my spirit that something was wrong.  Nothing had changed on the terror front between February 5th and February 7th.   Something else had changed.   I believe that the “behind closed doors” meeting with unnamed “prominent Republicans” on February 6th is what changed. Romney sold out to unnamed power players in the “shadow government”.  I believe that these “prominent Republicans” promised to help get the VP slot for Romney, and make 2012 “his turn”, in return for Romney quitting the 2008 race. 

That, not terrorism, is the logical explanation of why Romney quit.

Romney’s excuse of “I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror” was designed to paint Mike Huckabee into a corner.  Because, if Romney were to be believed, if Mike Huckabee didn’t quit and hand the nomination to John McCain on a silver platter, then Mike Huckabee would be “letting his campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror”.

Huckabee responded in his CPAC speech on February 9th:

I also was handed a book by Haskell Jones when I was a teenager. It was a book that was called “It’s a Choice, not an Echo,” written by Phyllis Schlafly. (Applause.) And that book had a tremendous impact on me as a teenager. Quite frankly, that book reminded me that in all of our lives, we should not simply be echoing the sentiments of others, but making deep personal choices about what we believe and, most importantly, why we believe it.

I realize that it is not politically correct to say what I’m about to say, but I’ve believed it since I was a teenager, and I will not recant it now. The reason that America is a great nation is because America is a special nation. And the reason America is a special nation is because it was founded by people who were first on their knees before they were on their feet. We are a nation rooted in our faith. (Cheers, applause.)

I’ve had the incredible privilege and joy to have visited almost 40 countries across the world. I’ve seen some magnificent things, experienced some dramatic and exotic cultures, tasted some delicious foods, experienced the hospitality and the warmth of many peoples, of many nations. I’ve sat and visited with heads of state, with heads of companies, and with ordinary people in virtually every part of this world, whether Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, nine times to Israel, to Russia, to all parts of Asia, Europe, Central America.

But in all of my travels and all of the ways in which I’ve touched other parts of the world, I’ve yet to find any country, as enchanted as I was with it, for which I would even consider for a moment giving up my citizenship in the United States of America to trade it for residence anywhere else on earth. (Applause.)

We are a special nation. (Applause.) And we are a special nation because, throughout our history, we have been people who have made choices rather than simply echo the voices of others. I know that there was some speculation that I might come here today to announce that I would be getting out of the race. But I want to make sure you understand. Am I quitting? Well, let’s get that settled right now. No, I’m not. (Cheers, applause.)

And the reason is simple — because I go back to that which helped crystallize in me a conservative viewpoint as a teenager when it wasn’t easy or popular to be a Republican or a conservative in my hometown, because I do believe that America is about making choices, not simply echoing that of others. Let others join the “Me, too” crowd.

But I didn’t get where I am today and I didn’t fight the battles in a state that, when I became its governor, was 90 percent Democrat, by simply echoing the voices of others. I did it by staking out a choice, stating that choice, making that choice and fighting for that choice, to believe that some things were right, some things were wrong, and it’s better to be right and even to not win than it is to be wrong and to be a part of the crowd. (Cheers, applause.)

I am ashamed to admit that I had no idea who Phyllis Schlafly was prior to that speech.  Where have I been that I could have missed her enormous contributions to conservatism

After that speech, I ordered a used copy of her 1964 book “A Choice Not an Echo: The inside story of how American Presidents are chosen“. 

Reading that book changed my understanding of politics.  It opened my eyes to what goes on behind the scenes to select our party’s nominee, so that we really don’t get much of a “choice” in November.    And the same things that were going on in decades leading up to when that book was written are still going on now, 44 years after that book was written. (Does “We’re Screwed ’08” sound familiar?)  It’s really quite shocking. 

Did you know that Mitt Romney’s father was actively involved in the “Back Room Deal” crowd in 1960?

Even after the book was written, did you know that Mitt Romney’s father ran for President (in 1968) when he was not Constitutionally eligible?  George Wilcken Romney was born in Mexico and was not a “Natural Born Citizen” of the United States of America.  Did that stop him from running for President?  No.

Forty years later, his son met behind closed doors with “prominent Republicans”, quit the race the next day, and pressured another candidate to quit the race.

Mike Huckabee didn’t quit in response to the McCain-Romney back-room deal.  In fact, the day of Huckabee’s CPAC speech, he won the Kansas primary with 60% of the vote.

The McCain camp started to panic.  They were running out of public financing money and, as Michelle Malkin said, McCain was about to be hoisted by his own campaign finance reform petard.  McCain had to find a way to make Huckabee quit before McCain ran out of money.  I believe they stole Washington state.  Huckabee was leading in the returns, and then all of a sudden McCain took a small lead and the vote was called with only 87% of the votes counted.  That is highly “irregular”.

One could make the argument that Romney quit for financial reasons…that he didn’t want to throw good money after bad.  My response to that argument is that Romney should have been honest about his reasons for quitting, and also explain why a full week later he took the additional step of “releasing” his delegates to McCain.  That move on February 14th had one and only one purpose: to put additional pressure on Mike Huckabee to quit.  I think that was highly unethical of Mitt Romney.

Huckabee fought the good fight against his own party’s leadership, just as Sarah Palin did in Alaska.

Huckabee fought the good fight against a biased MSM that rightly considered him their greatest threat since Ronald Reagan.

Huckabee fought the good fight against John McCain when McCain backed out of the originally scheduled February 28th CNN debate.  McCain did not want to debate Huckabee before the crucial Texas primary.

You said:

…with no real reason to dislike Huckabee. I disagreed with him on Global Warming and borders, but had no real animus toward him. I must admit, though, that I really did aquire a disdain for him as the race went on for one reason only: his persistent belittling of Mitt Romney.

Again, I was NOT a Romney guy, but Huckabee’s ongoing vendetta really made him seem like a petulant guy to me.

Maybe you can enlighten, what, exactly does he have against Romney? Did Romney once steal a girfriend of his or something? Seriously, it was obviously very personal and I never saw Romney – who seems like a quite decent, if boring, guy – reciprocate.

Huckabee’s Global Warming stance was against Socialist AGW taxes, but in favor of being a good steward of the environment.  He struck the right balance of doing the right thing without driving away potential voters who believe in AGW.

Huckabee’s immigration stance was right.

Now, in regards to Romney, Huckabee got blamed for “persistent belittling of Mitt Romney”.   Have you stopped to honestly evaluate Romney’s role in that battle?  Romney spent millions of dollars attacking Mike Huckabee.  Romney quit the race dishonestly and did everything in his power to try to get Huckabee to quit.

Mitt Romney gave “Values Voters” the finger when he refused to show up for the Values Voter Debate.

Huckabee was fighting the “Values Voter” fight against a corrupt Republican machine.  Mike Huckabee is a “choice”, while John McCain is an “echo“.  Huckabee was the “point man” who took every shot fired at him and kept going.  The shots from Mormons against Huckabee (and now Palin) haven’t stopped. 

I believe Mike Huckabee played a huge role in pressuring McCain to pick Sarah Palin.  Mike Huckabee deserves our respect and gratitude. 

You know what I’d love to see?  I’d love to see McCain’s corruption exposed, have him step aside, and let us have a Palin/Huckabee or Huckabee/Palin ticket. 

That would be change I can really believe in.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Romney vs. Huckabee

  1. NATE says:

    There is a time and place for all things. The time and place for “attacks” between republicans is during the primaries. Attacking after the primaries shows envy and desperation. There is no point to it. Even after McCain chose Palin Huck still is taking shots at Romney. You never address the timing, only the content of Hucks attacks in your post. Please write something about the timing because perhaps then people might understand Huck’s bitterness.

  2. Nate

    Huck still is taking shots at Romney

    Prove it.

    Huck was fighting the crowd who were incessently pushing for McCain to keep his promise to Mitt Romney.

    It’s All We Hear: Romney, Romney, Romney for McCain’s Running Mate

    Had McCain kept his promise to Romney, the McCain-Romney ticket would have played directly into the Democrat’s claim that the Republican Party is the party for “Rich White Guys”.

    McCain-Romney would have lost to Obama-Biden.

    Thank God that Mike Huckabee fought against a Romney VP pick.
    Thank God that Mike Huckabee fought for a “Values Voter” VP pick.

    The first would have led to an Obama Nation.
    The second will lead to a Republican landslide victory in November.

    Thank God for Mike Huckabee.

  3. NATE says:

    Yes he is still taking shots 6 months after the primaries ended. You are too. Want proof? read your own silly blog post

    “Did you know that Mitt Romney’s father was actively involved in the “Back Room Deal” crowd in 1960?”

    You wrote that AFTER Palin was selected as VP. You are just as bitter as Huck. Now please explain the timing of both Huck’s attacks and YOUR attacks . Please. Why can’t you guys drop it 6 months after the primaries? Seriously.

  4. Nate,

    You said

    Huck still is taking shots at Romney

    I said

    Prove it.

    You did nothing to prove that Huck took any shot at Romney after the VP selection was made. To the contrary, Huck has been very friendly to Romney, but Romney’s supporters still attacked Huckabee.

    My post was in response to ritwingr’s question from 3:13 am this morning. I’m explaining what happened in the race, to someone who didn’t have eyes to see it. Deal with it.

    I’d still like to see you prove your claim that

    Huck still is taking shots at Romney

  5. NATE says:

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/14/huck_vs_mitt_–_again.html

    Notice Romney dropped out Feb 7. Look at the date of this attack. Huck never stopped going after him. Romney never even fights back, look at Romney’s response to these attacks in the article. And now here you are attacking Romney’s dead father TODAY? What is up with you red pill?

  6. Nate,

    You don’t get it, do you?

    Mitt dropped out of the Presidential race on Feb. 7th, but the VP race didn’t end until last Friday.

    By fighting the McCain-Romney ticket, Huckabee saved us from the Obama Nation. Re-read this post and see if you can get the point.

    You said:

    Even after McCain chose Palin Huck still is taking shots at Romney.

    Prove it.

    Your link is from before the VP decision was made. Sorry, that link is not a winner. Please try again.

    {praying that Huckabee doesn’t toss out a light-hearted joke tonight that you take as another attack}

  7. Ritwingr says:

    This is all fine, RedPill, but you’r kinda proving my point. Again, Romney may or may not have been in the running to be VP…..it’s no justification for Huckabee’s petulance.

    Oh, and Global Warming is a comprehensive fraud and Palin has at least had the guts to say so – as Fred did, sort of. Huckabee pandered to the GW crowd, just as McCain has. That’s NOT principle.

    And Huckabee DID give tuition tax breaks to kids of illegals. That’s NOT the right position; that’s the pandering Juan McCain position. Huck was wrong, wrong, wrong on both those issues.

    Rit

  8. Ritwingr,

    Romney may or may not have been in the running to be VP…

    You’re kidding, right?

    It’s All We Hear: Romney, Romney, Romney for McCain’s Running Mate

    Romney, just like his father, is the epitome of the Eastern Establishment of the Republican Party, the back-room deal crowd that Phyllis Schlafly described in her book 44 years ago… long before Mitt decided to run for President.

    Mitt would have tanked the ticket, as Obama would have marginialized the Republican Party as the “rich white guy party”, and we would have ended up with the Obama Nation.

    Palin was clearly the right choice for McCain.

  9. Mitt and Mike will be on stage together in just a few hours.

    Let’s put this to rest for now.

  10. Ok, final wrap-up thoughts…
    I said this in an comment on Michelle’s site this morning…

    Early in the evening, I got tired of watching speakers play “Teleprompter Ping-Pong” as they shifted back and forth between the two teleprompters, rarely looking at the actual audience.

    Romney, Huckabee, Giuliani, and Sarah! all did a much better job of connecting with the audience.

    Two speakers brought me to tears…Sarah, of course, but also the story Mike Huckabee told about the teacher and the deskless classroom.

    Those desks aren’t free. Freedom isn’t free.

    To all of the veterans and active duty service members out there…

    Thank you!

    I just read this over at Hot Air, and I was honestly surprised to see people hammer Mitt and be kind to Mike. Usually it’s the other way around over there.

  11. Romney’s supporters, and many of Huckabee’s supporters (myself included), wanted Romney to keep his word and keep fighting. If you watch the video of his 2008 CPAC speech, there were audible shouts of “NO!” when Romney said he was quitting.

    MR. ROMNEY: … Now if I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention — (cheers, applause). I want you to know I’ve given this a lot of thought. I’d forestall the launch of a national campaign and, frankly, I’d be making it easier for Senator Clinton or Obama to win.

    AUDIENCE MEMBERS: No! Boo!

    MR. ROMNEY: Frankly, in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror…

    Here’s what Ed Morrissey has to say about the effect that had on the entire atmosphere of CPAC 2008:

    In 2008, the capitulation of Mitt Romney to McCain — who showed up and apologized for his snub the previous year — deflated the conference.

  12. To all of the people who falsely claimed that Mike Huckabee was helping John McCain in the 2008 Republican Primaries, I ask you to take note that Mike Huckabee has NOT endorsed McCain’s re-election.

    But Fred Thompson (who I contend was McCain’s stalking horse to help McCain win the SC primary) and Mitt Romney (who I contend both quit the race and “released” his delegates to McCain in the hopes of becoming McCain’s VP) HAVE endorsed McCain’s re-election.

  13. Despite persistent reports that Sen. John McCain is entertaining several candidates for his running mate, only one name consistently comes up in talks to aides: Mitt Romney. That is leading his supporters and surrogates to surmise that the former presidential candidate and McCain backer has the lead in the sped-up race to pick a No. 2. “All I hear about from headquarters is Romney this and Romney that,” said a longtime McCain ally. “And everybody is saying the same thing, like they have talking points already ready for him.”

    It’s All We Hear: Romney, Romney, Romney for McCain’s Running Mate
    July 22, 2008

    To me, that sure sounds like the “prominent Republicans”, with whom Romney met behind closed doors on February 6th, promised Romney that if he quit the race and backed McCain, they would use their influence to get him the VP slot.

  14. A comment I made at Michelle Malkin’s blog:

    On February 25th, 2010 at 12:53 am, ITookTheRedPill said:

    
“In my view, it’s hard to imagine the United States Senate without John McCain, especially in the critical times we find ourselves in, with double-digit unemployment, a mountain of debt imperiling future generations and a global terrorist threat from jihadists bent on destroying our very way of life.

    “It is times like these that we look to leaders of character. Senator McCain’s record of service and sacrifice for America is honored by all. But I believe that it is his core values of courage, faith and honor – forged in battle and confirmed by a lifetime of service to America – that make Senator McCain’s leadership in the United States Senate so necessary in these perilous times. Not only am I proud to call him a friend, but as an American I am constantly reassured by Senator McCain’s continued involvement in the affairs of our nation, and I am honored to support him.”

    While the challenges mentioned are very real, the words used in this statement are meant to stoke people’s fears, and then “reassure” them that, “It’s OK, John McCain will take care of you”.

    No, McCain will not take care of us. As Michelle says, John McCain is the problem, not the solution.

    Romney’s words and actions reveal that he is part of the problem, too.

    If he had kept his word in 2008, I would have been happy to have supported him if he went on to win the nomination.

    When he didn’t keep his word, and he did everything in his power to throw the race to McCain, I realized that I could never trust him.

  15. Another comment I made at Michelle Malkin’s blog:

    On November 11th, 2010 at 8:35 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    On November 11th, 2010 at 6:23 pm, WarEagle82 said:

    I really liked Fred early on. But it was obvious he had no intention of actually campaigning during the primaries. He made only slightly more effort than Rudy…

    Fred is a good guy but he isn’t interested in winning a Presidential election.

    Bingo. Neither was in it to win it. They were in it to help the establishment candidate, McCain, win it.

    And Romney sold out to the establishment, when he “huddled behind closed doors” with “prominent Republicans” on February 6, 2008 so that it would be “his turn” next time.

    Less than 48 hours after making a public promise on February 5th to battle “all the way to the convention”, Romney quit at CPAC, with the lamest excuse I have ever heard for quitting a political race:

    “Frankly, in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror”

    Nothing had changed on the terror front between February 5th and February 7th. Something else had changed. Romney sold out to unnamed power players in the “shadow government”.

    This is why I can never trust Mitt Romney again.

  16. On February 7th, 2011 at 2:12 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    3 years ago today, Mitt Romney dropped out of the Republican Primary, breaking a promise he had made publicly less than 48 hours earlier…

    More explanation:

    Late on Super Tuesday (February 5, 2008), Mitt Romney promised to battle “all the way to the convention”.

    Less than 48 hours later, after making that promise, Romney quit at CPAC, with the lamest excuse I have ever heard for quitting a political race:

    “Frankly, in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror”

    I knew in my spirit that something was wrong. Nothing had changed on the terror front between February 5th and February 7th. Something else had changed. I believe that the “behind closed doors” meeting with unnamed “prominent Republicans” on February 6th is what changed. Romney sold out to unnamed power players in the “shadow government”. I believe that these “prominent Republicans” promised to help get the VP slot for Romney, and make 2012 “his turn”, in return for Romney quitting the 2008 race.

    That, not terrorism, is the logical explanation of why Romney quit. Romney sold out to unnamed power players in the “shadow government”, and lied about his reasons for quitting the race.

    This is why I can never trust Mitt Romney again. He is not a man of his word.

  17. The unnamed “prominent Republicans” return to slam Huckabee in favor of Romney…

    “[Huckabee] hates Mitt, and his goal in Iowa last time was to stop him,” said one prominent Republican/a, who’s known both men for years. “If he sees an opportunity to cut Mitt off [during the nominating process], he will take it.”

    If Huckabee’s goal in 2008 was to “stop Romney”, then Huckabee would have quit once that goal was accomplished on February 7, 2008.

    But Huckabee didn’t quit, because his goal wasn’t to “cut Mitt off”, as those unnamed, so-called “prominent Republicans” claim. Huckabee’s goal was to win the Presidency, and Huckabee did not quit until McCain appeared to have clinched the Republican nomination with 1191 pledged delegates.

    Only 2 Republican candidates battled McCain all the way to the finish line… Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul.

    Romney broke the promise he made publicly on February 5th, by quitting the race less than 48 hours later on February 7th, 2008. Romney has no one but himself to blame for that. He should have kept his word and kept fighting. McCain was almost out of public financing money. Romney and Huckabee could have split the remaining primaries and forced a brokered convention, from which someone more conservative than John McCain would have emerged as the nominee.

    Instead, Romney broke his promise and quit.

    And, on February 14th, a week after he had quit, Romney did something that reveals his true (lack of) character…

    Romney was already out of the race. But Huckabee had not quit like Romney wanted him to, so Romney, out of spite, “released” his delegates to McCain.

    There is no excuse for that petulant behavior. Romney had already made his own choice to break his promise and quit. But after Huckabee didn’t quit and went on to win the Kansas primary with 60% of the vote, Romney did everything he could to “cut off” Huckabee and throw the race to McCain.

    A proper rewording of the blockquote above would be:

    “Romney hates Huckabee, and his goal on February 14, 2008 was to stop him. If Romney sees an opportunity to cut Huckabee off [during the nominating process], he will take it.”

  18. My comments at Politico:

    —————————————————————————

    Six facts about the 2008 Republican primary that you neglected to mention:

    1) Late on Super Tuesday, February 5, 2008, Mitt Romney promised to battle “all the way to the convention”.

    2) The next day, Wednesday, February 6, 2008, Mitt Romney and his advisers “huddled behind closed doors… Some advisers reached out to gauge the feelings of prominent Republicans.” (See: http://www.webcitation.org/5slc4UNhh)

    3) On Thursday, February 7, 2008, Mitt Romney broke the promise he had made less than 48 hours, and quit the race.

    4) If Huckabee’s goal in 2008 was to “stop Romney”, then Huckabee would have quit once that goal was accomplished on February 7, 2008. But Huckabee didn’t quit, because his goal wasn’t to “cut Mitt off”, as the unnamed, so-called “prominent Republican” in your piece claims. Huckabee’s goal was to win the Presidency, and Huckabee did not quit until McCain appeared to have clinched the Republican nomination with 1191 pledged delegates. Huckabee was one of only two candidates to go the distance against John McCain. (The other candidate who went the distance against McCain was Ron Paul.)

    5) On Saturday, February 9, 2008, Mike Huckabee won the Kansas primary with 60% of the vote.

    6) On Thursday, February 14, 2008, Mitt Romney tried to “stop Huckabee” and “cut Huckabee off” when Romney, out of spite, “released” his delegates to McCain.

    —————————————————————————

    “Mitt Romney has shown nothing but class since Huckabee and McCain tag teamed him in the 2008 primary”

    Was it class when Romney broke his promise and was not a man of his word?

    Was it class when Romney lied about his reasons for quitting the race? (Hint: Terrorism had nothing at all to do with why Romney really quit)

    Wasn’t it Romney who “tag teamed” with McCain against Huckabee, when Romney “released” his delegates to McCain?

    The answers to the above questions are no, no, and yes.

  19. …with a focus on behind-the-scenes conversations with reporters to shape coverage of Perry…

    Oh, so ethical… NOT!!!

    I think a lot of voters have had enough of “behind-the-scenes conversations”.

    And I think a lot of voters have had enough of media manipulation and spin in election coverage.

    We don’t want the media’s preferred candidate, regardless of their party label.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s