American Huckster

The victory of Former Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR) in the Iowa GOP Caucus has had various sectors of the opining Right reeling with shock, dismay and, often, anger.

It’s the shock that is the most revealing; not revealing of the winner but of many of the pundits. Pundits seem to have forgotten—or had never considered—the proclivities of human nature when considering who appeals to the average person. Two factors of that nature played key roles in the governor’s victory.

Starting with the charisma factor, Huckabee is a smiling, pleasant individual who talks with a sweet, measured voice adorned with the soothing Southern cadence and style of the preacher that he is. He uses the language of hope, change and unification of Americans of both parties. And that’s what people like. For better or worse, people are tired of the polarization which the Bush and Clinton families seem to evoke. People want to feel good about their president and want him (yes, him) to make them feel good. And Governor Huckabee does indeed do that—if you’re not looking too closely.

If you are looking closely, you’ll notice that the governor is utilizing another tool that is made more palatable to some by his dulcet tones and that tool is… tribalism. Yes, I said it--tribalism. Even more disconcerting, the governor is using that tribalism to cover for the fact that his gubernatorial record is anything but that of a conservative.

“What’s the composition of Huckabee’s tribe,” I hear you ask. That “tribe” is composed of Christians. As it happens, I happen to be a member of this “tribe” also, but I’m under no illusion that I am supposed to agree with or vote for another other member of that “tribe” simply because of shared membership--any more that I agree with the words and deeds of all Luos; or all Americans. Others members of the Christian “tribe,” however, have noticed Huckabee’s label—Christian and former Baptist minister-- and aren’t bothering to read the list of ingredients.

Huckabee says to Republican Christians, “I’m one of you; vote for me” and enough Republican conservative (?) members of our “tribe” in Iowa said “okay, we will.”

Does any of this sound familiar? Okay, this analogy is a very imperfect one to the situation in Kenya in that there are no allegations of voter fraud and no dead bodies. (I might be forgiven for stating these obvious disclaimers because if I didn’t, some screaming Mimi is always lying in wait to twist the words of an ideological opponent. Ask Glenn Reynolds and Jonah Goldberg.)

Now some of the Republican “tribal outsiders” are preparing to blame the “Christian Right” if Huckabee become the GOP’s nominee for president even if the vast majority of those on the Right who are Christian find Governor Huckabee to be a totally unacceptable candidate for president; a sort of reverse tribalism, if you will. (Or maybe it’s a form of profiling. Or some other concept created to designate bad stuff. Heck, all this infighting of various sets of brethren makes me want to build my desert bunker.) This is what is being stirred up by Huckabee’s wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing candidacy.

*****

I began to write the above missive right after Governor Huckabee won the Iowa Democratic Caucus. Today we read from a Daily Press article (via Bryan Preston at Hot Air) that the governor used to use a term for his “fellow” Republicans—“Shi’te Republicans”—to refer to a

species of Republican true believers […] in Arkansas who've always suspected his bona fides as an honest-to-goodness fiscal conservative and social reactionary.

Says Bryan:

He’ll say conservative things in order to win approval from some part of the party’s base, but when push comes to shove he instinctively goes for the non-conservative side of the argument. I’m not just talking about calling Republicans “Shiites,” a quote that’s sure to get played over and over again if he’s the nominee, or about his raising taxes rather than cutting spending as the Arkansas “Shiite Republicans” wanted him to do, but about his swift shifts on issues like Gitmo and using the leftish “bunker mentality” slam on the Bush administration.

Christians, he’s a liberal in Christian Right clothing. One might as well vote for Clinton or Obama.

One more thing: am I the only one that is insulted on behalf of the Iraqis that an American politician running for president is using the religion of the majority of their citizens as a pejorative?
I'm sure that will do wonders for our Iraq policy. :::insert rolling eyes here:::

Comments

[DarkStar]

At its core, politics is about tribalism: us vs. them. That is tribalism. Look at your post: liberal vs. conservative.

So while I understand the reason for the post, I have to be surprised at the nativity.

Frankly, ma'am, this "liberal" vs. "conservative" stuff is killing the country along with deflated values, cynicism, apathy, LUXURY,...

Question: How much light do you see/read/hear in the so-called Christian Right or those you may want to identify as the Christian Left?

Question: Does it matter?

You're cool people. Must right and wrong be about "right" and "left"?

It makes no sense, to me, to have faith drive you and then align with any political party when the sole aim if any political party is to obtain power and then keep power.

[DarkStar]

"if" == "of"

[baldilocks]

My 'nativity?' :-)

You didn't quite get it, my dear. Tribalism is *not* alignment with those with whom you are in ideological agreement.

It *is* alignment with those with whom you share some superficial covering/culture on ideology--political, religious, etc.; it makes no difference--which have nothing to do with that covering/culture.

You know my politics. If I were to vote for Maxine Waters (my congresswoman) because she's a black woman like me, then *that* would be "tribalism"--in two senses. Gloria Steinem is exhibiting "tribalism" when she says that Clinton should be elected before Obama because women have been more oppressed than black men in this country.

It makes no sense, to me, to have faith drive you and then align with any political party when the sole aim if any political party is to obtain power and then keep power.

It doesn't make any sense to you because you're imputing your assumptions in this area onto others. Three of those assumptions are in this statement.

Also, could you re-type your first question?

[DarkStar]

Tribalism is *not* alignment with those with whom you are in ideological agreement.

Sorry, but there is no real ideological agreement. If there were, some Bush policies wouldn't have been supported by the majority of the Republican pols in congress. Instead, they grimaced and swallowed the Castor oil for "the good" of the GOP. That, is tribalism.

Now, the first question is, "How much of the Christian light do you see/read/hear in the so-called Christian Right or those you may want to identify as the Christian Left?"

Help me out and list what you think are my 3 assumptions.

[baldilocks]

Um, Ed, regarding the first paragraph, you're agreeing with me.

What is "Christian light?"

One of your assumptions is that the main subject was Christianity.

Two: that faith has anything to do with contemporary political alignments.

Three: that my subject has to do with power.

[baldilocks]

Help for you: He's using "Christian Rightness" as a covering which he thinks will get him elected--a concept which others think is important. Then he turns right around and bashes the "Christian Right" as "shi'te" republicans. Those who would vote for him because of the label and ignoring actions are engaging in "tribalism."

This observation is no judgment on my part regarding the Leftness or Rightness or anythingness of any random Christian.

[DarkStar]

Um, Ed, regarding the first paragraph, you're agreeing with me.

At the lower level, yes. At the higher level, not really. The lower level is the appealing to Christians. At the higher level, I don't understand why, for example, Christians would align as a block to support any party. Now, stating that, my main thrust wasn't about Christian voters, though it was, to me, a good jumping point, but it was about party politics in general.

Just like Dems play [American] Blacks, the Repubs play Christians.

What is "Christian light?"

This is what I mean.

13"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.

14"You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. 15Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.

Two: that faith has anything to do with contemporary political alignments.

For some it does. I can't help but notice the evangelicals who are trying to get Blacks to vote Republican by stating Christian beliefs don't align with the Dem party.

Three: that my subject has to do with power.

No, that's part of my cynicism, meaning politics, at its core, is about power.

[baldilocks]

Let's back up. My original point was that Huckabee is using his religion to get votes from Rightwinged Christians--using his Christianity to cover the fact that he's not on the Right as 'his fruit' in Arkansas have shown. He's using his religion as a shield against criticism from those in his own party. That is wrong.

If you want to argue about something else, such as whose putting out more "Christian light," I'm not up to it. If I were, that's what I would have written about.