Huckabee Sides With ACLU on Gitmo Closing and Waterboarding, Stop the ACLU Blogburst

From Stop the ACLU:

Bryan Preston has a must read on Huckabee.  Via Washington Post

After the Iowa poll showed that Republican voters like him but found him much less “presidential” and “electable” than Romney, Huckabee sought to build his foreign policy credentials, meeting with a group of retired generals who are in Des Moines to urge the 2008 candidates to commit to opposing torture. After the meeting, Huckabee joined Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in declaring his opposition to the interrogation procedure known as “waterboarding,” and said he would support closing the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a contrast with the other leading Republicans.

MIKE HUCKABEE: I’ve been to Guantanamo, I was there, I guess it’s been about a year and a half ago. I think the problem with Guantanamo is not in that its facilities are inadequate. It’s the symbol that it represents. It’s clearly become a symbol to the rest of the world as a place that has become problematic for us as a nation. I was quite frankly impressed with the quality of the facilities and even the attention to care that was given to the detainees, but that aside, it doesn’t alter that Guantanamo to the rest of the world is a symbol that is not in our best interests to continue pursuing.

Thought I have been critically observing Huckabee as his popularity rose, and found him lacking in many conservative areas, I was seriously considering giving him the benefit of the doubt on much of it. I was thinking that if it came to it I could pull the lever for him. Considering my own opinions on the war on terror and how it should be fought being the number one issue in my considerations, I will find that more difficult to do now.

Bryan Preston:

Ok, so now we know he wants to put the detainees at Leavenworth. If SCOTUS doesn’t grant them habeus corpus, that move is likely to as the nearest federal judge will have the ACLU camped out in his inbox. What then? And what happens when the Gitmo critics just move on to start criticizing us for holding the detainees at Leavenworth? The end result of Huckabee’s stance will be to grant the detainees full rights in US civilian courts, either that or freeing them, since he won’t take the stand that our detaining them at Gitmo is both lawful and humane and has established the precedent that he’ll retreat in the face of unfair and unreasonable criticism of the US.

Sorry, Governor, no sale here.

Ameripundit:

With any luck, this will be the end of Huck’s presidential chances.

Slublog:

Guantanamo is not a “symbol.” It’s a facility (and a relatively nice one, as far as detention centers go) where we keep people who have pledged to do us harm. If we close the facility and let these people go, some will keep their promises.

Flopping Aces:

He’s soft on immigration, soft on taxes, and apparently soft on our national security. How in the world is this guy rising in the polls?

Oh, and Gitmo has come to symoblize what’s gone wrong with the war on terror? Puhlease. If anything its come to symbolize that we treat those who should be shot better then how we treat our own criminals.

Paul at Powerline:

My main objection to Huckabee — the reason why he’s my fifth choice out of five — is that I lack confidence in his ability to fight terrorism. It’s not just that he lacks experience in this realm, though that’s certainly the case. The real problem is that he’s too moralistic (which is not the same thing as moral). My first clue came when he said during an early debate that we need to remain in Iraq because “we broke it.” Not because we need to defeat al Qaeda; not because we need to limit Iranian influence or avoid a devastating defeat at the hands of terrorists; but because we injured this formerly peaceful state. Huckabee’s exaltation of moralism (in this case dubious) over policy calculation was difficult to miss.

Now we learn (but are surprised) that Huckabee opposes waterboarding and would close the Guantanamo Bay detention center. Huckabee reached this conclusion after meeting with a group of retired generals (the usual suspects, I assume) who are lobbying candidates to oppose Bush administration interrogation and detention policies.

Ace:

Huckabee is a smooth talker and charismatic. But I’d like to know why the Republican base is getting so enthusiastic over an unrepentant pro-amnesty guy and a dude who wants to shut down Guantanamo and outlaw waterboarding. And raise taxes, of course.

True enough, Giuliani, Romney, and McCain might split the party were they to gain the nomination. But wouldn’t Huckabee do so as well and perhaps much worse? I really can’t support a guy who takes the liberal position on several of my top issues.

The backlash begins! I agree. After combining all the liberal positions Huckabee is standing on…he won’t be getting much support from me either.

Jammie Wearin Fool:

Doesn’t sound like he will very tough on the terrorists now does it? At one time I thought Huck might be my man but in the last couple of weeks he has really shown his weaknesses. I am still holding onto Fred Thompson and I would like to learn more about Duncan Hunter. They may be the last chance of finding a conservative in this field of what appears to be RINO’s (Republican In Name Only)

Last chance?  Haven’t they been they been the best chance all along?

Also see:

Fred Thompson: Consistent Conservative

I might as well stop playing around and make a decision on who I’m rooting for in the primaries. I wrote of gun-grabbin, pro-abortion Rudy long ago. I’m not comfortably confident with where Mitt stands on the issues. I was giving Huckabee a chance, but as of today I’m writing him off. McCain doesn’t excite me at all. Tancredo has a great record, but he ran as a one issue candidate. Ron Paul…nah. I like Duncan Hunter, but short a miracle he won’t climb the polls. Fred Thompson, as he isn’t shy to point out, is consistent. I agree with him on every issue I can think of. While his campaign hasn’t been the most exciting, his record, consistent principles, straightforwardness, and likability win me over.

I may get behind one of the other guys if Fred doesn’t get the nomination, but for now you can call me a Fred Head. 

vidoe hat tip to Hot Air

PS: I still like Duncan Hunter alot, so I’ll root for him too, and hope he gets picked for VP if he doesn’t win.

I join the ranks of my blogfathers John Hawkins and Emperor Misha

Also, my blog brothers William Teach, and Kender.  And my blog sisters Beth and Greta.

 

Pirate's Cove linked with I’m With Fred

Also see:

Why Huckabee Has My Vote, R.J.Godlewski

     

Comments

[Bill Mitchell]

I'll tell you in one sentence why Fred Thompson will NEVER win the nomination and why he is lagging in the early states where it counts.

Ready? Here it is.

"He has never governed."

That's it. It has been 47 years since we elected someone who hadn't either been a Governor or VP.

Experience trumps everything and Fred has NONE.

That's his real problem and one that can't be solved in the next 30 days.

[Angel]

Theres NO one worth voting for..truly!

[Rastaman]

Nobody wants to hear it but I'll keep saying it until proven wrong...

Hillary Clinton is going to be our next president. Like it or not. Of all the candidates on both sides, she's the most popular and she has the backing of her party, which now enjoys a voter majority. As for Fred Thompson, he's a hack. A back-stabber. Two-faced. And that's very much documented. The man flat cannot be trusted.

8 years of a weaselly liar is enough, don't you think?

All of our presidential choices suck. As usual.

Rasta

[Grouch at Right Truth]

Bill Mitchell on Fred Thompson:

"He has never governed."

Neither had Abraham Lincoln or John F. Kennedy. I checked and I could find that neither had held executive office (they were legislators). Does being a legislator disqualify one from being chief executive? Not necessarily.

On the other hand does having executive experience qualify one to be president? Gasp.....look at Jimmy Carter!

Rastaman on Fred Thompson:

"As for Fred Thompson, he's a hack. A back-stabber. Two-faced. And that's very much documented."

and the Hildabeast is not?

I am not convinced that Hillary is a shoe-in. She seems to be crumbling in the polls. Her negatives are uncomfortably high. Barack is nipping at her heels at least in Iowa.

It's gonna get real ugly I think on both sides.

I have not decided who I'm voting for yet, and may not until the last minute.

[heidianne jackson]

i'm a fred head. as for saying the u.s. won't elect someone who hasn't held executive office - who on the democrat side can claim that type of experience?