More Huckabee love

Michael Brendan Dougherty has an American Conservative profile of Mike Huckabee that makes me love the guy even more. Didn't say I'd vote for him -- he's wrong on Iraq, but Dougherty indicates that there's reason to believe that a President Huckabee would be a lot more sensible than, heaven help us, a President McCain. Huck is vague on policy, but big on character. Here's what I mean -- it's what's great and what's flawed about Huckabee:

Huckabee’s policy naiveté, and his willingness to label as “unholy flames of racism” what most see as vigorous and honest disagreement, signal that he is a sort of character wonk—more concerned with the morality of the citizenry than with the laws that govern them. Unlike Obama or Bush before him, Huckabee asks us not only to rise above partisanship but to rise above ourselves.

This is a vision of the executive as “Uplifter in Chief,” the role Huckabee seems most anxious to play: “The president of the United States ought to lead Americans to think the best, be the best and act the best. We ought not pander to the lowest common denominator of thought.” It’s a message alternately inspiring in its aspirations and smug in its condescension.

On Sunday, Huckabee ambles into the Manchester First Assembly Church to deliver a message about the nation’s families. “How will the next generation learn to make a family work, if today, none of us are making a family work?” he asks. He defines “family” in such a way as to rule out gay marriage and abortion, but he never mentions politics. Instead, he exhorts the congregation to consider a definition of love that is an act of the will, not a flight of emotion. He tells about an ex-pastor taking care of his Alzheimer’s afflicted wife—how he tenderly talked to her and fed her each meal, every day for years after she had ceased to recognize him. As he finishes and heads out for his next engagement, there are few dry eyes. The governor never asked for votes. He didn’t have to.

If we're going to have a Republican president after Bush, of the lot we have to choose from, I hope it's Huckabee. I mean, I love Paul on the war, which is my most important issue, and according to the quiz you can take at the bottom of this entry, he's my candidate, because I agree with him 53 percent of the time; but I've not been sold on him as president, and besides, what about the other 47 percent? Isn't it odd that the candidate that I most agree with I also disagree with about half the time? No wonder I'm so depressed about this election.

Anyway, about Huck, I don't want an Uplifter in Chief; I want a Commander in Chief. But more than that even, I want a man of character who seems comfortable in his skin, who seems normal, and who seems like he understands what ordinary folks are going through. I want a different kind of Republican (and I wouldn't turn my nose up at a different kind of Democrat, either). I don't think that's likely to happen, President Huckabee, but I'd lurv to be wrong. And if he doesn't make it, I sure hope that he stays active in national politics -- though come to think of it, he might change more lives for the better if he'd leave the stump and get back in the pulpit -- or start a think tank. After the big GOP wipeout next fall, there's going to be a bull market for rethinking American conservatism. Wherever Mike Huckabee ends up doing his political and cultural thinking, that's the place a lot of us will be paying attention to.

He needs to call me up next time he's in Dallas and go with me to the Old Monk for beer and conversation about "Exile on Main Street" and crunchy conservatism. I met him once, on his way out of the Dallas Morning News, and gave him a copy of "Crunchy Cons," shameless self-promoter that I am. So he's got no excuse at all! Heh.

[Hey readers, take the Politalk quiz and post the results in the combox.]