From pro-illegals to no-illegals in one fell swoop

Richard Lowry writes about Mike Huckabee’s amazing Anti-Amnesty Pledge:

Now Huckabee has gone from supporting the Bush amnesty plan and righteously declaring in a debate that children of illegals shouldn’t be punished for the sins of their parents, to promising to chase them all—man, woman and child—from the country. It might be the most nakedly political turnabout any GOP candidate has made in the race.

One would have to agree with Lowry that it is a stunning turnabout. But whether the move was nakedly political, or the result of Huckabee’s hearing arguments and concerns that he had never heard before, or a combination of the two, remains to be seen. It would be interesting to know the conversations and thought processes that led Huckabee from his old position to his new one.

- end of initial entry -

Alex K. writes:

The main way we can tell that a candidate hasn’t gotten serious on immigration is if he justifies his new-found hawkishness on the grounds of security or the grounds that it’s unfair to legal immigrants. That’s what Huckabee’s been doing ever since he got the vague idea some months ago that immigration is an issue. (He admitted to a reporter that he was surprised it was such an issue even far from the border; they all share that surprise, though only Huckabee admitted it). We can start to believe a politician’s come around when he starts identifying the actual economic and cultural effects of the problem. So far, Huckabee has specifically cleared the masses of racism by assuring reporters that no one is concerned with people making our beds, cleaning our houses, etc. It’s just security and fairness. Let’s see if he keeps that up or starts talking about the real problems with immigration.

Paul Henri, a life-long resident of New Orleans, writes:

Regardless of your other commentators, realize that Romney is the best candidate. Huckabee is an Arkansas idiot who will say anything. Romney has a habit of carrying out his promises. Huckabee has a habit of being somewhat stupid. Romney is brilliant. McCain is just a washed up old man. My Daddy was as much a hero as McCain was, and my Daddy wasn’t elected Senator. So many of our men were heroes yet they ain’t got a s___s chance towards the presidency.

Terry Morris writes:

“One would have to agree with Lowry that it is a stunning turnabout. But whether the move was nakedly political, or the result of Huckabee’s hearing arguments and concerns that he had never heard before, or a combination of the two, remains to be seen. It would be interesting to know the conversations and thought processes that led Huckabee from his old position to his new one.”

I don’t deny that true and sincere overnight conversations do actually happen occasionally, but I tend to go with the odds, and the odds tell me that sincere lasting overnight conversions are very rare occurances, whether we’re talking religion or politics or whatever. Generally when one of these overnight conversions happens it isn’t long before the individual experiencing it reverts back to his old ways; the ways in which he is more comfortable and accustomed to thinking. So I’m pretty skeptical of Huck’s new position on immigration, in other words. I personally need to see him stick to these new positions for a few years, and become even more restrictionist in his thinking. That’s not too much to ask of a potential “conservative” president, and if he thinks it is, he isn’t qualified to serve as president on that basis alone.

I agree that it would be interesting to learn how Huckster came to his new understanding of the immigration issue, though. I’d very much like to see the arguments and understand the thought processes that persuaded him. Perhaps he’ll share it all with us sometime.

In sum, though I’m a whole lot more in agreement with Huck’s new position on immigration than I am his old one, his complete 180 on immigration in such a short span of time disturbs me more than anything.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 18, 2008 07:42 PM | Send