Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Why Can't We Have Both?

I’m a Southern Baptist pastor, so naturally I’m going to support Mike Huckabee for president. Or at least that’s what some people might think. After all, Huckabee and I have so much in common. He’s a former Baptist minister; I’m a current one. He worked in the radio industry before serving in full-time vocational ministry; so did I. He and I both hail from a state that begins with the first letter of the alphabet. Why would I not support him?

Well, let me start out by saying that I think Mike Huckabee is a wonderful Christian man and a quality human being. I’ve been reading his book Character Makes A Difference, and I can honestly imagine him being one of my close friends if we ever had the chance to know one another. In fact, I could see him coming over to my place to watch football and eat chicken wings. I think if I knew him personally, I would genuinely like the man and enjoy spending time with him. But does that mean I think he’d make a great president? Not especially.

I know Huckabee’s doing well with evangelical voters right now, and that’s primarily because he’s a Christian who is strongly opposed to abortion. And I applaud him for that. In fact, if the election in November were between Huckabee and any of the pro-choice Democrats (take your pick), I’d choose the pro-life Huckabee in a second. Huckabee’s social conservatism would be a much better alternative than the liberalism espoused by Clinton, Obama and Edwards. That choice for me would be a no-brainer.

But what about some of the other issues, apart from abortion, that Huckabee is not so conservative on. I hate to go all Dr. Phil on everybody, but the best indicator of future behavior is taking a look at past behavior. And if Governor Huckabee’s record in Arkansas is any indicator, I’m afraid he leaves a lot to be desired for a conservative voter like me. So just for a moment, let’s look at some of the things that the former governor supported that are serious warning signs on my radar screen:

1. He has opposed school choice initiatives (vouchers), earning him the endorsement of the National Education Association in his state. That is a major red flag for me.

2. He supported giving scholarships to illegal immigrants in Arkansas. And when asked what his plan for securing the border is, his answer: Chuck Norris. That’s funny, but it tells me nothing. I think we need a president who will get tough on illegal immigration. Taxpayer funded social programs need to go to our legal citizens, not to those who are here illegally.

3. He has shown contempt for our foreign policy concerning the war on terror. Despite some missteps, I believe this war against Islamic extremists is one that is morally justified. And it is a war we must win. I don’t think Mike Huckabee is the best choice to be commander-in-chief given the post 9-11 world we are living in.

4. He raised taxes while he was governor of Arkansas. Perhaps if he wouldn’t have given those scholarships to illegal immigrants, he could have balanced the budget without a tax hike.

That’s just four of the issues that concern me with Mike Huckabee. Yes, he’s a social conservative who believes like I do that life is sacred and should be protected from the womb to the tomb. But he’s not a conservative in the mold of Ronald Reagan, and Christians who think he is should take a good, hard look.

It seems to me that the Republican Party has become split between the social conservatives (i.e. the Christian right) and those who are fiscal conservatives (i.e. Rudy Giuliani). And my question is: why? Why does it have to be that way? Why can’t we have both?

Why can’t we have a candidate who is both socially and fiscally conservative? Why can the GOP not unite around a nominee who would bring both sides of the debate together and forge a coalition that could defeat Obama or Hillary in November? You can call me a dreamer, but I don’t think it’s too late for that to happen.

When it comes to elections, I vote on issues. Not party lines, not personalities, but issues. What the candidate stands for. And although I’ve never personally endorsed anybody for president, I do see one man who seems to be the best choice when it comes to the issues that are important to me. He is both a fiscal and a social conservative. He’s a straight talker, and he doesn’t check the polls before he makes a decision. He does what he believes is right, regardless of what popular opinion might be. His name is Fred Thompson. I believe he is the clear choice for those who want a solid conservative, both socially and fiscally, in the White House.

For all my evangelical brothers and sisters out there, let me urge you to think before you vote. Don’t vote for somebody just because they will be a “strong Christian leader.” Vote for the person who will do the best job as the leader of the free world.

And for my Southern Baptist brethren, let me remind you that we’ve had two of our own elected president in modern times: Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Maybe that should tell us something.

Hiatus Is Over

After taking a break from the blogging world, The Lambert Commentary will make a return with a new post later today. It's been a while since I've sounded off, and I've got a lot on my mind. First on the agenda: a post about the current state of the Republican presidential race entitled, "Why Can't We Have Both?"

Both what? Candidates? Parties? Ideas?

I'll let you know in just a little while.