Fred vs Huckabee

Scott Miller at The Conservative Post has written an article talking about the fact that Huckabee may well be a Social Conservative, he is not a Fiscal Conservative (I would add that his protectionist talk falls into a different area: Foreign Relations Conservative).

The question is whether or not the Social Conservatives care. If the Social Conservatives just care about an "electable" candidate that is socially conservative, then they may not care that Huckabee is not conservative in any other way. On the other hand, if they look at other areas then they will reject Huckabee for someone else (I hope Fred).

I think that most social conservatives would be short-sighted to not include other areas as well. The reality is that the three areas overlap and effect each other. But then again, I think that many within the Social Conservative movement tend to litmus test candidates (e.g. they are really litmus testing Fred on the "Marriage Amendment" when his version of the proposed amendment will be easier to get passed, will achieve the same thing and is philosophically more consistent with the foundations of our government than the marriage amendment that they propose). The problem with litmus testing is that you lose the big picture for the sake of the small picture.

Here is my "big picture" question for Social Conservatives: which candidate do you think will stand on his principles, but yet be able to work enough with the opposing party to get those principles enacted into law?

If your answer is Ron Paul, then you are as nuts as he is.

If your answer is Huckabee, I would agree to a degree, but you will end up seeing social policy done more like what GW Bush has done rather than Reagan.

If your answer is Fred, then I would agree with you.