opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Tony Blankley
Tony Blankley
14 Dec 2011
Newt's Past and Future Leadership

Almost all political commentators agree on one thing. The Republican presidential campaign is unlike any we … Read More.

7 Dec 2011
Secular, Liberal Egypt: We Hardly Knew Ya

One of the nice things about human history is that no matter how much people or their leaders misjudge events … Read More.

30 Nov 2011
How to Break the Partisan Fever

Sunday on "Meet the Press" Colin Powell blamed divisive, poisonous Washington politics on the media … Read More.

None of the Above: GOP Heading to a Brokered Convention


The Republican Party primary so far has been an exercise in none of the above. In their turns, Sen. McCain, former Mayor Giuliani, former Sen. Thompson and former Gov. Romney seemed to be or seemed about to be front-runners — only to fall back as the party's likely voters got a sharper look at each of them. Even my old boss Newt Gingrich, without even announcing, had a handsome surge from 4-5 percent to 18-20 percent in February — before falling back to single digits.

Now former Gov. Huckabee — for the moment surging to the front — is on the receiving end of withering intraparty fire applied with a rhetorical violence usually reserved by Republican polemicists for a Clinton or a Kennedy. Just as social conservatives earlier this fall threatened (for a couple of weeks) to run a third-party candidate if Giuliani got the nomination, so Washington GOP elites are willing to misrepresent parts of what Huckabee has said and written in a savage effort to destroy any chance he might have of being elected.

It is as if each faction of the Grand Old Party feels a stronger passion to defeat its intraparty rival factions than to defeat the Democrats in November. This maximum instinct to deny victory within the party may be a sign of a philosophical rebirth (as in the Goldwater nomination and campaign of 1964), but it is also a sign of a party likely to lose the next general election.

The alleged Huckabee shocker of the week (for the GOP D.C. regulars in journalism and blogland) is his description of President Bush's foreign policy as plagued by an "arrogant bunker mentality." This phrase, according to Romney and his journalistic coat holders, is disloyal to President Bush and is right out of the Democratic talking points.

There is just a touch of insincerity in that charge. During the past year or two, one couldn't have lunch at The Capital Grille (preferred dining spot for big-time D.C. Republican politicians and journalists) or other similar locations without hearing the constant complaint that the Bush White House was arrogant and wouldn't listen to their friends about Iraq or about domestic matters. Until Eddie Gillespie came in as counselor recently (and started reaching out), the word "bunker" was a plausible and often-used word to describe the White House — even on Iraq policy before the surge this spring.

Perhaps the more honest charge against Huckabee on this point is that it is not politique to say such rude things in public about your own party's president.

On the other hand, criticizing a president whose job approval rating is between 30 percent and 35 percent may not be the least useful thing his aspiring replacement could do with his time and syllables.

There has been some fair criticism of Huckabee's foreign policy statements. His use of homely schoolyard parables to explain foreign policy hit wide and short of the mark. In supporting the idea of diplomacy, he fails to point out its limitations and risks. And his sometimes-harsh assessment of American intentions is unfounded. In short, it sounds in places a little squishy and insufficiently "nuanced."

On the other hand, he is for a rapid major increase in the size of the military. He is in favor of military action, if necessary, to deny Iran a nuclear bomb. He demands that we stay and fight and win in Iraq. And his discussion of the risk from radical Islam is as tough and realistic as I have heard. In fact, as the author of a book that was judged alarmist by some on the topic of radical Islam ("The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?"), I could find little to complain about in his long discussion of the topic.

Of course, the track record for foreign policy campaign promises is not great. Presidents Wilson and Roosevelt promised to keep us out of World War I in 1916 and World War II in 1940, respectively. Kennedy would fix a missile gap that didn't exist. LBJ would not get us into a major war in Vietnam. Nixon had a secret plan to get us out of that war. Clinton promised not to parley with Communist Chinese dictators. And George W. Bush promised a humble foreign policy and no nation building.

In a dangerous world such as ours, I would like to hear more (and more careful) words from Huckabee. But basically he seems to be a hawk — and thus not beyond the Republican pale (although his hawkish ways come with a perhaps-rhetorical bow to the current nervousness of needed independent and suburban Republican voters). I also would like to hear more (and more thoughtful words) than the mere GOP boilerplate we are getting from the other candidates, with the exception of McCain and sometimes of Giuliani.

I don't have a candidate yet. I either disagree with each on important points or have doubts about the electability of each. But most of all, I fear our intraparty fury will destroy all leaders and send us off to a brokered convention — and from thence, probably to defeat. If the Democrats have their candidate by February and we are campaigning harshly until August, we surely would start in a deep hole.

Tony Blankley is executive vice president of Edelman public relations in Washington. To find out more about Tony Blankley and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at



1 Comments | Post Comment
I was all set to be a Huckabee supporter, and he really does say the right things. The trouble is, sometimes he also says the wrong things, like his National Smoking Ban. I can't stand to be within 50' of a cigarette, but I can certainly recognize Big Government when I see it. Then I hear things like his swipe at Mormonism and having the Feds dictate executive pay, and I start thinking, "what the hell kind of Republican is this?" When I start to get confused about what a Republican is supposed to be these days, I know we need to call a doctor to come in and treat this patient.

When John McCain supports Amnesty and campaign speech restrictions and Rudy Guliani is so adamant about protecting us from our rights (and is unelectable by conservative women), and Mitt Romney is about whatever is going to get votes or babbling on nonsensically about religion and freedom, and nobody seems to care about the hockey-stick inflation curve, man, one day it hits you upside the head that we need a return to principles, and re-boot the Democratic Republicans.

There's only one guy out there who isn't pretending to be from the Hawkish Socialist Party, and it's Ron Paul. He's the only guy who you would even recognize as a Republican if you wound the clock back a few score years. And, if you're sick of GOP boilerplate, well, there it is. He's only a lone voice in the Wilderness because everybody else is lost.

Electable? Let's put it this way - put him up against any of the unabashed socialists on the other side and the electorate will have a very bright line to separate their choices. They can choose what America should look like in big, bold strokes, not subtle nuances. Polls are one thing, and it's very likely that only a small number of likely Republican voters who feel like talking to the dain-bramaged pollsters are Ron Paul's type, but up here in NH we have 40% independents, open primaries, and more Ron Paul yard signs than any other, of either party. We always tell people to "put there money where their mouth is" and his supporters are doing just that. That's a real poll. If we ran elections that way, he won. And, hey, if we might lose in November, why not go for the gusto and not be afraid of who we are?

I disagree with him on several policy issues, especially how to exit Iraq, but I also recognize that our government is out of control, with $50T in real debt and so-called Republicans spending like drunken Democrats and both parties' elected officials changing our system of government in order to protect that government which no longer exists.

I can't vote for that. I'll give some to win what's most important, and fixing America is where we need to start. America is more important than a party, but if the Party gets its House in order, perhaps we can have both.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Bill McGonigle
Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:50 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
Tony Blankley
Dec. `11
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
27 28 29 30 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Authorís Podcast
Walter Williams
Walter E. WilliamsUpdated 10 Feb 2016
David Limbaugh
David LimbaughUpdated 9 Feb 2016
Froma Harrop
Froma HarropUpdated 9 Feb 2016

1 Nov 2011 A Time for Statesmen

31 Oct 2007 Small-Tent Conservatives

26 Jan 2011 Regulations and Rhetoric