Open letter to Mr. Huckabee on the recent election

Dear Mr. Huckabee, 

You believe that the defeat of your party in the most recent election must be evidence that "our country has slipped into a deeper state of dependence on government than I wanted to believe."  I am confused as to how an election victory for one party can have anything to do with our "dependence on government" unless of course you believe that anyone who votes for a black man must ipso facto be either of color, dependent on government, or both.  Since most of those who are dependent on government - through programs from social security and Medicare to Medicaid to veterans benefits to food stamps - are white, and many of them voted for Mitt Romney, how does this support your thesis?  Do you really believe, as your colleague at Fox News Bill O'Reilly claims, that minorities are looking for handouts from their government, like children looking for free candy?  What evidence do you have from exit polls or other demographic data do you have that this is the case?  

As a man well-versed in Biblical allegories, you compare your national government to "Goliath."  Since Goliath was a giant individual, not a giant government, is this not an odd comparison?  Also, in the Biblical contest between David and Goliath, David, not Goliath, won.  If you are trying to make the case that Mitt Romney was trying to slay what you call the "Goliath of government", why did he lose?  Since the Old Testament story is an attempt to show that god favored David even over a giant, doesn't the latest electoral outcome say exactly the opposite - that god must (at least this election cycle) favor what you see as a giant government?  Or perhaps Mitt just wasn't up to the role of playing David. 
Of course, for any of this to make sense, President Obama must have been responsible for runaway growth of this "Goliath" of a government. As it turns out, most of the growth in government came from his predecessors, particularly the last one, and only two presidents since Eisenhower have had lower rates of government growth than President Obama. 

You go on to claim that our "real problems are not political, but spiritual."  Do you really believe that those flooded out of their homes, men, women and children of all faiths, would agree with you?   Do you think FEMA should be put in charge of setting up places of prayer rather than distribution shelters for food and shelter (through cash vouchers)?  Do the one out of five American children in poverty many of whom have to skip at least one meal a day and go hungry - many who belong to devout families - really need spiritual fulfillment more than food in their bellies?  And why can't they have both?  Since both campaigns generally agreed on the problems facing our nation from the effects of the Great Recession to foreign policy difficulties abroad, what puts you in a position to be able to second guess both, identifying "real problems" that were evident to neither Obama nor Romney?  Since Romney never offered a spiritual solution for what ails us, how would voting for him have solved these "real problems" you believe actually face us? As you admit, "both parties have failed to acknowledge that" (meaning agree with you).
You claim that "Democrats have not wanted to even acknowledge the need for God in our public institutions" to which I must respond that you have not even wanted to acknowledge the need not to split infinitives.  

But I digress.  In virtually every public address, President Obama, a Christian, has acknowledged god in some form and has led prayers during time of national tragedy.  At no time has he moved to strip religious language from the Pledge of Allegience, for example, even though it was inserted in 1954 during the McCarthyist era.  He has not challenged any courthouse displaying the 10 Commandments, and has gone out of his way to please the bishops lobbying against having to implement healthcare reform, offering them multiple exceptions that they have publicly and loudly denounced through press conferences (rather than negotiating in good faith). 

You further claim that Republican leadership mentions god not to out of humility but only selectively, such as in the unquestioning, unconditional support of the current right-wing Government of Israel, which you describe as a "badge of courage."  I can agree with the absence of humility part, but how are Republicans behaving like lambs on the issues of "life and marriage"?  As I recall, they quite vocally opposed abortion prohibition even in the case of rape or incest and the life of the mother (which they believe is never endangered by pregnancy, something that many obstetricians would be curious to hear), and as recently as a week ago, Paul Ryan was telling evangelical Christians that President Obama was waging a "war on religion." The Republican party even went so far as to claim that conception through rape is god's will and that in the case of "legitimate" rape a woman's body has a way to "shut that whole thing down."  Is this lamb-like behavior?  

Regarding the Lion of Judah, his mention in the Bible is not associated with a war on abortion or gay marriage, none of which are really mentioned in the Bible at all.  In your Christian tradition, the Lion of Judah has come to represent Jesus who is allegedly (according to one Biblical version, contradicted by another) from the tribe of Judah.  In Revelation 5:5, this lion makes a cameo appearance:  

And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.  

Again, loosening seals is not very violent and has nothing to do with gay marriage.  Even the version of the Lion of Judah that entered pop culture through Aslan in C. S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia does not rant against marriage equality or in vitro fertalization or stem cell research, as you seem to imply he should. 

You suggest the Republican party should "gear up and get ready for the next battle."  What battle?  We transfer power peacefully in this country via ballots, not bullets.  Are you advocating a coup?  And if you just accused the GOP candidates of being lambs rather than lions, why do you write next battle?  You just said they didn't really fight for what you call our "real problems."  I am confused. 

You claim that the Republicans are a "party of principle" but what principle are you referring to?  Do you not mean principal - it's accumulation and freedom from taxation?   Are you implying that the Democratic party is not a party of principle?  Or could it just be that we share many principles, but prioritize them differently, or that we see different means of achieving the same ends from alleviating poverty, providing healthcare to all citizens, ending war and capital punishment, and other Christian mandates?   Is it really your role, as a mortal among mortals, to be claiming that yours is the party of god and that any Christians who vote for President Obama would go to hell as you did prior to the election?

After bemoaning how the Republican party didn't mention god enough or in the right way, you then claim that they should not "stop believing what we believe" but rather "do a better job of doing what we're supposed to do."  Circularity aside, that claim seems to negate everything you said earlier.  

Finally, you claim that [only by Republicans] "attract[ing] voters and win[ning] elections" can you "save America from herself." Why are you so mistrustful of America that you feel she is inherently self-destructive and needs to be saved?  And do you honestly believe that this salvation can only come from the Republican party?  Since America is not a fixed entity, but a work in progress and a democratic one at that, who says America has to agree with you?  Apparently "she" doesn't.  You seem to confuse losing an election with losing a great Biblical battle between good and evil.  Isn't this a tad grandiose?

One thing the Bible does warn us against is idol worship.  When agreement with our own ideas becomes a litmus test for godliness and righteousness, are you not really saying "my will" rather than "thy will" be done? And if so, how is this compatible with the humility of a good Christian?


Sincerely,


Mike Victor


Appendix:

Growth of government:
After the spending burst of 2009, Mr. Obama, constrained by Congress and aided by repayments of bank and auto bailouts, increased spending just 0.5 percent a year over the next three fiscal years when adjusted for inflation; only two other three-year periods since Eisenhower had lower spending growth. - New York Times


Full O'Reilly and related quotations:

– BILL O’REILLY: “The white establishment is now the minority. And the voters, many of them, feel that the economic system is stacked against them and they want stuff. You are going to see a tremendous Hispanic vote for President Obama. Overwhelming black vote for President Obama. And women will probably break President Obama’s way. People feel that they are entitled to things and which candidate, between the two, is going to give them things?” [Fox News, 11/6/2012]

– RUSH LIMBAUGH: “It’s just very difficult to beat Santa Claus. It is practically impossible to beat Santa Claus. People are not going to vote against Santa Clause especially if the alternative is being your own Santa Claus. [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 11/7/2012]

– SEAN HANNITY: “One other thing that we need to come to terms with as a result of last night. What appears to have happened is that the liberal welfare state in this country has now grown. More and more Americans have become dependent on that welfare state. As they have, they have found themselves siding with the party of government.” [Fox News, 11/7/2012]

– STUART VARNEY: “With Obama’s victory, the takers have taken over. The makers are clearly in the minority.” [Fox Business, 11/7/2012]

Twelve Things the Republican Party might learn from this election.

Twelve Things the Republican Party might learn from this election



To my Republican friends:  I know what you are feeling right now.  We went through it in 2004.  We survived and you will too.
But here's the thing.   Buried in that campaign are some nuggets of true wisdom.  As Ben Franklin once said, That which hurts instructs.  Perhaps this isn't the best teaching moment and I really do not write this in a spirit of gloating (it was a close, painfully expensive election after all). I simply hope that we can stop the food fight, grow up, roll up our sleeves and work together as adults.
In that spirit, I offer you twelve things Republicans might learn from this election.

Don't lie.  It worked with Iraq, it worked (to a certain extent) with the intelligence failures leading to 9-11, but I really do think the American people have a learning curve.   Don't talk about Jeep moving jobs to China when the CEOs of those companies have internet connections and are bound to hear those whoppers sooner or later.   Don't say the economy is going in the wrong direction when you know damn well that a.) it was in freefall when President Obama took office and b.) it may not be moving as FAST as you like, but the DIRECTION has been UP since it bottomed in 2009.  Don't talk about a War on Religion (see below) that does not exist.

Don't tell the truth.  I know this sounds contradictory, but if you are going to run on a platform by the 1% for the 1% don't ever actually say that out loud, especially if someone might be recording you.  If you do lie, lie consistently, otherwise the times you do tell the truth, we will discover not just the fact that you were lying all along but the complete disdain you have for most Americans, including soldiers, veterans, retirees, the poor and disabled.  In an age of tiny cameras and YouTube there are no closed doors anymore.  To solve this problem, how about writing a platform and running a candidate that honestly represents all Americans?  It would end up being a lot easier since you don't have to keep track of what version of Romney you are supposed to be today.

Don't make up goofy stuff about the president.  If you don't like his policies, his values, or even the color of his skin (I'm looking at you, Glenn), just say so.  People might even forgive you for saying that you are harboring a little racism even in 2012, but it just sounds weird to have Donald Trump out there fronting your latest conspiracy about his birth certificate or college transcripts or a black power transformative agenda rooted in Kenyan anticolonialism (Newt).  Just say it:  he does not look like your image of a president which is closer to George W. Bush on a circling aircraft carrier in a custom made flight suit in front of a Mission Accomplished banner.  That sort of thing.

Stop attacking women.  They make up half the electorate and they vote.  Perhaps your staff didn't tell you that, but most women, even those who might agree that abortion rights should be restricted a bit here and there, do not like the idea of having men in government coming up with all sorts of nutty ideas about how they are going to force rape victims to get a vaginal ultrasound probe that doctors say they don't need and women say they don't want.  And for god's sake drop the whole contraception thing.  It's weird.  That was settled law a century ago and the science hasn't changed all that much.

Don't misrepresent science.  If you don't think oil companies and coal companies who contribute mightily to your campaigns would be as profitable if they were regulated a bit more or had to compete with a thriving solar or wind power industry, just say so.   Some Americans might forgive you.  But don't make jokes about not intending to do anything about rising sea levels because those rising sea levels might rise in a major, election-changing way days before the election.  American education might not be as strong as it should be in this area, but most Americans trust NASA, the National Institute of Health, the CDC, and scientists in general far more than they trust lawyers in suits writing laws saying that climate change doesn't exist (or that abortion causes breast cancer or never is needed to save the life of the mother).

Don't talk about rape except to say how you would prevent it.  Rape is not funny and there is no way to put it in a cute little evangelical package and use it as a vehicle to sell your anti-abortion stance to the American people.  Most (but not all) rape victims are women and you are not going to get any mileage with them parading men in front of the cameras telling them how their bodies have way to "shut that whole thing down" (if it's "legitimate" of course) or how it's a gift from god (yes, you were referring to the baby, not the rape, but no rape, no baby).  It's your weakest argument against abortion and take my advice - just don't go there.  Ever.

Vet your candidate.  If you demand to see all of his tax returns before he runs, guess what - the American people are going to want to also.  Maybe his tax returns are as boring as his anecdotes about his wife falling on her rump on a stage once (true story), but the more they are withheld and the more Mrs. Romney said she had told "you people" all we needed to know, the more our imaginations went to work.  It's like an obscenity.  Just say the word.  Bleeping it out only makes our mind fill in the blanks with all sorts of dastardly things that might not even be there.  And if they are... well, perhaps the GOP should run another candidate with less dirt.

Stop talking about a war on religion.   Wars involve killing people.  Wars on religion often involve rounding people up, putting them in ghettos or camps, then killing them.   Asking religiously-affiliated universities and hospitals (that receive massive amount of federal funds) to play by the same level, federally-mandated playing field as everyone else is not the same as the Holocaust or the Crusades.  No one is forcing bishops to use contraception, but if they offer their employees healthcare, that plan has to include copayment-free access to them.

If you are running on a platform that is essentially that of President Bush, at least have the decency to invite him to campaign and to the Convention.   It's hard to sell another package of tax cuts and a more muscular foreign policy (does this mean another war?) to the American people without explaining why this would be less disastrous than the first time we tried that.  And who better to explain the nuances of how a Romney first term would really be a Bush third term, than W himself?  Admittedly he is not the most articulate of spokesmen, and probably has an awful lot of brush to clear on his ranch, but he, like Romney before the first debate, can be coached.  Not having him even attend, much less speak at a Convention that highlights and amplifies all of his policies is just plain weird.  His silence on the campaign trail was palpable.

Don't try to buy an election - it's a waste of money.  You guys spent billions (and so did the Democrats admittedly) raising limitless corporate donations, but even Karl Rove and the Koch brothers were slapped down this cycle.  It doesn't mean you can't dust yourself off and figure out a way to come roaring back in 2 or 4 years, but you need more than money.  You also need honesty, a commitment to reality as the rest of us know it (facts and stuff), and a plan that is different than the one that got us in the mess you criticize President Obama for not having fixed fast enough.  It still comes down to one citizen, one vote, and more of us are voting than ever before.  And most of us don't watch Fox.

Don't exploit a terrorist attack for political gain.  All right, admittedly it worked for you in 2004 when you almost literally ran on the legacy of 9-11 (a masterful twist since this happened on your watch).  But don't try to create a conspiracy over the tragic deaths of 4 Americans abroad when you guys ran an election on your failure to prevent the deaths of almost 3,000 Americans.   You can't have it both ways, as much as you would like to.  And when Americans die abroad, please have the decency to keep your "unraveling" theories to yourself.  It's mean-spirited and at least one of the victim's relatives asked you to stop.

Finally:  Leave Big Bird out of this.  He may have a funny voice but he is like ten feet tall and is a hell of a lot more popular than your candidate.



And before you get out your tea bags and assault rifles and orthographically-challenged signs demanding your country back (again), please consider how that turned out the first time.  We got healthcare done anyway, the Supreme Court upheld it, and - what do you know? - President Obama is still your Commander-in-Chief.  The American people chose him not once but twice.

Be adults.  Let's work together on real problems.  God knows we have enough to solve.

Romney, meet a few members of the 47% not taking personal responsibility for themselves