YouTube/Google Rewrites the Debating Rules

Tonight's YouTube debate on CNN was historic (as was the previous one for the Democrats). The questions were hard-hitting, imaginative, and generally wonderfully stated. And as much as I dislike CNN, they did a great job in hosting it, especially Anderson Cooper.

Several of the candidates seemed to do better tonight, although Romney and Giuliani hurt themselves by going at each other after the evening's first question on illegal immigration.

Fred Thompson finally showed up as a candidate tonight, and answered several questions well, although I think he blew it on Social Security.

Ron Paul was himself, only more so, which means his cult following is now more entrenched, but he's also more marginalized.

Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo did well, but didn't get a lot of air time. I think they're both dead in the water.

John McCain was more lively and had some good answers, but he's just too moribund. He doesn't inspire…me anyway.

Mitt Romney looked good a few times, and looked awful a few times. His contrition about being wrong on abortion was touching, but then again, if the guy didn't settle such a basic question until he was in his fifties, what does that say about his own moral center?

Rudy Giuliani said what he always says: "I get results." But his scrap with Romney hurt him tonight. So did his waffling answer on whether or not he believes the Bible is literally the word of God (God's word, yes, but not literally. Doesn't believe, for example, that Jonah was in the belly of a big fish. Wonder if he thinks the prohibition on abortion is also figurative.)

My guy, Mike Huckabee, did well (and the CNN pundits agreed, although they noted that he got too many lightweight questions). Thompson is trying to paint him as an economic liberal, but Huckabee notes that as governor of Arkansas he had to work with a Democrat legislature that outnumbered Republicans almost 9 to 1. Thus, he had to reach compromises with them to get anything done at all.

Huckabee now leads in Iowa, and is second in both South Caroline and Florida. Most importantly, he's done this without much money. In other words, his message is converting everybody that hears him, and word of mouth is causing his popularity to spread like wildfire amongst true conservatives.

He's hot. Cool!

Holy Wars Batman!

Nearly 80 French policemen have been injured in Paris in riots over the past few hours, and they complain that, unlike 2005, this time the "youthful" rioters possess combat weapons and hunting rifles.

What amazes me is how the news media are so faithful in leaving out the near certainty that the rioters are Muslims. Political correctness has the European media, as well as mainstream American outlets, by the throat so tightly that they've become oxygen deprived and can never report the truth.

Too bad, because that's the only thing that would start to set them free.

Electing Mike Huckabee

I had the opportunity to meet Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee last evening at a reception in Tampa, and to hear him speak for about 20 minutes. I have not been so impressed with a politician since—yes—the days of Ronald Reagan. Political "handlers" just cannot teach a man to communicate as genuinely, effectively, and easily as Huckabee does.

Newsweek Magazine hits the nail on the head (and practically plagiarizes this blog!) in a piece where they opine that Huckabee is The GOP's Best Bet to beat the Left next November.

Huckabee comes across more hopeful than Giuliani, more believable than Romney, more intelligent than Thompson and fresher than McCain. He would hold the base and capture moderates drawn to his down-home style. His greatest asset is that he alone among the Republicans "speaks American." He connects to his audience with stories and metaphors and a geniality that can't be faked. "I'm conservative but I'm not angry about it," he likes to say, and it's true; his gentle mocking of the intraparty warfare that broke out during the Fox debate—likening it to a "demolition derby"—confirms the point. This was Reagan's secret, and it worked for Huckabee in Arkansas, where he won the votes of independents and Democrats.

Jonathan Alter, the Newsweek writer, also notes that Republicans in general (and Rudy Giuliani in particular) are running on fear. I couldn't agree more, especially after suffering through an hour of Sean Hannity in person here in Gainesville a few weeks back. I've been a Hannity fan for several years and really looked forward to seeing the guy up close. But his entire speech was based on what and whom he fears: Hillary Clinton. Furthermore, he's dedicating his whole career for the next year to engineering what he terms "The Stop Hillary Express."

I think it's a huge mistake to identify yourself by what you're against. Yet Hannity is doing precisely that, as is Giuliani, whom reporter Alter calls a "dark candidate." Dark politics hardly ever work, especially in presidential races, because voters seek a leader who is hopeful about the future. Jimmy Carter, whose perceived humility (immediately post-Watergate) got him elected and whose blatant incompetence got him unelected, spoke the language of "malaise," until Ronald Reagan came along announcing that it was "morning in America."

Presidents set spiritual climates. Carter's combination of hopelessness and ineptitude precipitated a despair that hurt our economy (21 percent prime interest rate) and emboldened our enemies (the Iran hostage crisis). Reagan's optimism and sheer leadership ability dispelled Carter's clouds and brought the sun back out (and sent quite a few overseas rats scurrying for cover).

Huckabee lacks the Gipper's movie-star looks and marquee name, but possesses the wisdom, character, poise, and charm that make for a good, perhaps even great, president. Do yourself and your nation a favor. Check him out and then take action here.

Uncle Sam's Big Nose

Christianity Today reports that Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley (R) has decided to investigate the ministry finances of Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, Benny Hinn, Eddie Long, Joyce Meyer, and divorcing pastors Randy and Paula White. In fact, it appears that Grassley is conducting a complete audit, because the IRS hasn't been able to keep up with the "exponential growth of all tax-exempt organizations."

Well, whoop-dee-doo! If that's a problem, the answer isn't to pressure the ministries. It would be far better to simply dismantle the IRS, because they are the problem. "Based on initial review, the way ministries operate has changed significantly over the last 20 years to 25 years, while the tax laws governing them for the most part have not," Grassley's office said.

Notice those words, "the tax laws governing them." There's the rub. The State is meant to leave the Church alone, outside of enforcing criminal laws (the Church is supposed to settle civil suits amongst its own members.) Concerning taxes, taxation is an exercise of sovereignty: "I'm going to take something of yours by force." Hence, it is also an act of sovereignty to say to the Church, "I've decided to exempt you from this," because whatever the State gives, the State can take away.

The Church should be considered tax immune, not tax exempt, since it is not within the State's authority to "grant" such status. Even though I strenuously object in principle to Senator Grassley's meddling, I'm thankful he is the one doing it, as opposed to someone on the Left. The champions of "tolerance" are anything but when it comes to Christians.

An Open Letter to Sean Hannity

Dear Mr. Hannity,

Last evening I heard you speak at the fifth annual Ronald Reagan Black Tie & Blue Jeans dinner here in north Florida. To be honest, I was a bit disappointed, because you devoted so much time to bashing Hillary Clinton, a dead giveaway that your career currently is motivated more by fear of losing than by vision for winning. It is a huge mistake to define yourself by what you're against rather than what you're for, and far better to be known for providing answers than for trumpeting problems.

Your best moments were those commemorating President Reagan's true conservatism. In that regard, here is the kind of speech I wish you had given:

Lights…cue "Let Freedom Ring"…aaaannd action!

("Listen" to Sean's voice.)

Thank you so much for the invitation to join you this evening. (Tell 3 jokes, all clean. No Bill Clinton innuendo. Wallowing in such filth soils a conservative too. Continue…)

You know, I once heard a woman say she was running for office because—quote—I love politics. And I remember thinking how that was the most compelling reason not to vote for her. Seeking office because you love politics is like getting married because you love sex; it's a sign of dysfunction, not qualification. Moreover, voting for such a candidate is like seeking marriage counseling from someone who's been to the altar several times. (I once heard Mickey Rooney say in all seriousness that his eight marriages demonstrated his commitment to that institution.)

We have gathered this evening not, I hope, because we love politics, but because we love life. And we celebrate life in part by celebrating the exemplary life of one of the greatest of all American presidents, Ronald Wilson Reagan. We would do well to define ourselves as conservatives in terms not just of his deeds, but of his character. Peggy Noonan had it right: for a while, Character was King. Such greatness does not come from a love for politics, but from a love for life, and even more, from a love for the Truth.

America's great problem today is that people don't love the Truth, because they don't believe it exists. Instead those on the Left espouse "preferences," while those on the Right embrace "values." Both terms, of course, are convenient, elastic substitutes for the inconvenient rigidity of absolutes. President Reagan, you see, did not merely love truth; he loved the Truth, with a capital T. He knew that God in heaven is not "whatever you conceive Him to be," but that He is the Almighty Creator and Lord of this world and every other world. He understood that all authority belongs to God, and that the bits of authority He delegates to men are just that: bits, limited jurisdictions to be overseen in the clear light of accountability to Him.

Human beings were created to be lovers of the Truth, but failing that, we will love something else. We will find another foundation upon which to stand, another seat from which to govern. For those on the Left, that foundation is politics, and that seat is civil government. They try to tell us that we should keep religion out of politics, yet politics is their religion. They believe in salvation by federal legislation. The state is their god, and the public school is their church. Thus they harp at us to keep the God of the Bible out of both public office and public classroom, because they have already enthroned their god there and fear the competition.

The god of the Left has a name, of course, and Ronald Reagan identified it in speech after speech, long before he became president. It is called socialism, and it is actually more goddess than god, the spirit not of Big Brother but of Big Mother. Margaret Thatcher called it the nanny state, and I call it Hillary Care. We should not be surprised that New Age brand of goddess worship sprouted from the same roots as radical environmentalism, modern feminism, and modern effeminacy, aka the Gay Rights movement. Nor should it surprise us that these groups not only cheer one another's parades, but also overwhelmingly vote Democrat. Those on the cultural Left, from Mrs. Clinton to Ms. Streisand, from Mr. Obama to Mr. Kucinich, see the state as an organ of nurture, a giant breast meant to suckle the unfortunate masses who cannot feed nor clothe themselves, who need the wise and benevolent benefactors we see in the Democratic debates, competing on the dais to see who has the most nipples.

Such collectivist arrogance gives no place to Truth greater than itself. In fact, today's American collectivists, so-called progressives like Clinton, Reid, Pelosi, Obama, and company, are paradoxically sure that truth is relative. They celebrate its many forms with words like diversity, tolerance, and preference. You live by your truth and I'll live by mine. Whatever you believe is okay as long as you're sincere. Same sex marriage? No problem, as long as it's "true" love. Abortion on demand? Well, I personally oppose it, but I can't make that decision for someone else. Birth control for preteens? What a great way to prevent abortions in the first place!

The alternative to this hideous mix of debauchery and demagoguery is not some soft, compromised metrosexual middle ground. The answer to a lie is never another lie. Yet that, unfortunately, has been the GOP's predominant tendency since at least 1994. Oh, we haven't fallen for the gooey relativism of preference; we're more moral than that. Why, we have—what's the word again—values! Yeah, that's the ticket: values!

Problem is, values is a word every bit as malleable as preference, a slightly more religious sounding substitute for Truth, but a substitute nonetheless, with plenty of wiggle room when needed. Well, America, there may be room to wiggle, but there's no more time. The current state of jihad requires us to make haste in returning to the Truth, and that particular road home must begin by returning to the junction where we strayed, and facing a fact: Once our party of "values" took control of the House and Senate, they became the people St. Paul warned young Timothy to avoid: "lovers of themselves…having a form of godliness but denying its power." Drunk with power, they feasted on neocon pork and slept with special interests, seducing pages on the side. God give me the guillotine of socialism over such hypocrisy; at least death will come quicker.

Today's conservatives, if we will return to the faith of our fathers, can do better than that—much, much better. If we will take our stand upon the sure footing that all truth is God's Truth, we can, in fact, resurrect our rapidly dying culture. We can see an end to an abortion industry that every day kills more Americans in the womb than died in the twin towers on 9/11. We can see an end to the culture of greed, where the fear of litigation ratchets up costs everywhere from the doctor's office to the candy store. We can see an end to that gigantic Ponzi scheme called Social Security, and to the extortion racket our tax code has become. If we'll return to the Truth, we can see an end to the culture of so-called tolerance whose lack of common sense renders our nation's borders so porous as to be non-existent.

If we conservatives will heed King Solomon's wisdom to "buy the truth, and do not sell it," then we can not only preserve our own liberty, but we just might be able to prevent our fickle friends in Europe from sliding even further down the sluice of socialism, into the deadly grip of Islam. And most importantly, if we conservatives will humbly and penitently lead our nation back to its spiritual foundation—that all truth derives from God's Truth—then we will find that our strength is renewed, our vision clear, and our national backbone restored. And with our feet once again on solid ground, we will not only defeat those who have arisen to destroy us, but begin anew to shine the light of God's love and mercy to a world that has largely forgotten both.

---------------

That's the short version, Sean, a skeleton to put some meat on. The few shots it takes at Hillary are necessary, accurate, and not cheap. And if it breaks Reagan's 11th Commandment not to speak evil of another Republican, that's only because we Republicans have so flagrantly broken the original Ten. Repentance, as they say, is good for the soul. And under the present circumstances, I'd say it's more than good; it's critical.

Jim Gilbert
Gainesville, Florida