NOT "THE NOBLEST ROMAN": PORTRAIT OF A HUCKABEE DEFECTOR

TOMORROW (FRIDAY) I'M GOING TO DISCUSS RECENT EXAMPLES OF PEOPLE HURLING SLIME AT RUDY GIULIANI, REGARDED AS AN AUTHENTIC HERO BY MOST PEOPLE WHO RESIDE OUTSIDE THE POLITICAL FEVER SWAMPS. GENERALLY, HEROES ARE IMPERFECT BEINGS, BUT AT LEAST THEY'RE NOT "AVERAGE."

I urge everyone to read Adam Brickley's superb essay on how he originated the Sarah Palin Movement and how fabulously it's succeeding (also on blogroll): http://www.uccs.edu/~scribe/index.php?article=opinion-3

This morning (Thursday) on CNN there was a story about a 12-year-old Anglo-Hispanic boy who has leukemia and has started a very successful national campaign to find bone-marrow donors. He said, "As human beings, it's our responsibility to look out for others." (Out of the mouths of babes)

Yesterday, D. Roman of Wisconsin, a person who masqueraded for a few months one of the strongest Mike Huckabee backers (see comments at http://themaritimesentry.blogspot.com defected, apparently to support someone else. If Mother Theresa converted to Lutheranism, the surprise could not have been greater. I believe D. Roman represents the sickness -- moral, intellectual, and political -- that infects a small portion of the Republican Party, and I'll have much to say about him and his ilk over the next few days.

With his new-found political independence, Roman spent the post-debate period denouncing Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani. The latter is justifiably an American hero to most people, and the former is on his way to becoming one. Roman is one of those moral and ideological sad-sacks who believes that disagreeing with a candidate on one or more issues means the subject of his venom must be "lying."

On Roman's site, I questioned his Christianity, something I do about once a century. Being a Catholic Christian (or a Protestant Christian) means fulfilling many obligations that we'd rather avoid. It doesn't mean manifesting a kind of "Church-Pew-Piety" apparently designed to make one feel good about himself. Also, it doesn't mean making malicious allegations about people (Huckabee and Giuliani) who hold views other than your own.

Christians are under a strict obligation (Commandment not Suggestion) to love their neighbors, all six billion of them, including "illegal" immigrants and the children (often American citizens) of those illegals. People who hate the Second Great Commandment are free, in a sense, to hate their neighbors, whether that neighbor be Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, or a Guatemalan scaling a fence to get into the land that historically welcomes the "huddled masses yearning to breathe free."

D. Roman is now denouncing me on various sites, pointing out that MaritimeSentry is one of those "his-and-her" operations and that I mistook S. Roman (his helpmeet) for him. Of course, he ascribes malice to my confusing his wife's screed about Giuliani with one of his. Frankly, he (or she) originally talked about removing "our backing" from Huckabee. I wondered if that "our" was a modern version of Queen Victoria's "royal we," as in "We are NOT amused."

My inference is that the Roman household is not one where spouses or children are encouraged to demonstrate a whole lot of intellectual or spiritual diversity. "We" would not be amused by such deviations.

D.R. takes issue with my view that they (he? she? bicycle built for 2?) "trashed" Mike Huckabee. Here's what they (the "I" version) said about the debate:

"I felt this was Mike Huckabee's worst debate. He struggled in the beginning and topped it off by insulting citizens who want a secure border, but he was extremely strong on Iraq and very articulate on that point. Ron Paul had some extremely good points, but came off as naive on foreign policy. Overall I think that Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo had their best performances and belonged on stage.

Tom Tancredo, a thoroughgoing nativist who once announced he was against "legal immigration," had a "good performance?" Rep. Tancredo is now getting 4% of the Republican vote and is getting a good chunk of his money from organizations that are rather virulently racist. (Note: I have a lot of admiration for Duncan Hunter, but his candidacy seems to have escaped the attention of the American people.)

One of the Romans mourned the lack of an appearance by Newt Gingrich, who campaigns in 1974 and 1976 I supported with money and time. My "break" with Rep. Gingrich reflected in part the fact that his first wife (of many), Jackie, and I were phone friends. Jackie is the one that Newt, after an apparently serious affair, approached in the hospital (where Jackie was being treated for cancer) and asked her to sign divorce papers. Later, of course, the second wife went the way of the first. One of the Romans (both?) denounced Rudy Giuliani for failures in his "persoanl" life. On that basis, they might well reconsider their admiration for "Newt."

Why "their" dismissal of Huckabee? Because he's not conservative enough on immigration or on the possibility of voting rights for the District of Columbia (which would add two Black Senators and a Black House member, presumably all Democrats). Also, strangely and almost comically, because he would sign congressional legislation banning smoking in public places. Personally, I smoke but if I were President I might well sign such a ban.

Most sane people agonize over the issue of "illegal immigration." In the Bible, Jesus doesn't seem to be strong on the issue of border security. Also, which of us -- if we lived South of the border and were facing a bad life for ourselves and our children -- wouldn't choose to climb over the fence?

To D. Roman, enforcement of "border security" -- something apparently only enforced when it involves brown people -- is a case of "rendering unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Of course, under Caesar it was illegal to be a Christian, a point the Romans apparently haven't reflected on sufficiently. The line from the Bible goes on to say "render unto God that which is God's.

I've always had the uneasy feeling that God didn't give me any extra points for having the luck to be born in America. Somehow I don't believe God thinks more of me than He does the Hispanics who constitute our modern day "huddled masses yearning to breathe free." Living a Christian life is sometimes, as T. S. Eliot said, sometimes "hard and bitter agony."

From everything I see, Mike Huckabee --a Christian who talks the talk AND walks the walk -- agrees with me. In fact, the Family Roman's other bete noire, Rudy Giuliani, also seems at one with with us.

The Huckabee Movement, a strong one that's getting stronger, is lucky to be without the dubious "services" of D. Roman/S. Roman. They'll be much happier with another candidate, but I doubt the reverse is true.

(Note: This is not the last word on this subject.)

Take a look at larryperrault.blogspot.com for the YouTube video of the exchange between Mike Huckabee and the occasionally daffy Ron Paul.

Note: I was extremely impressed as I said yesterday by the marvellous response Sarah Palin made to a question about the supposed need to cut ehtical corners. She said:

SARAH PALIN: "Right. Well, that's why I think we need more real and normal and hardworking and blue-collar Alaskans to want to run for office and serve in these positions that are making decisions. Again, I will personalize this. I am not from that other world. My dad as a school teacher wasn't a mover and shaker developer making big bucks in the state of Alaska off of property development. My husband [a commercial fisherman and oil field worker] isn't that way. I am not raising my kids to be that way.... If you want to be in public service, it is being willing to serve Alaskans for the right reasons. It is having to have a servant's heart when you come into these positions. It's not to get rich."

Of course, some conservatives -- such as The Club for Growth types who also vilify Mike Huckabee and probably now feel the same about Sarah -- believe (wrongly) that it's better to have many servants than to be one. They're wrong. "As for me (and her), we shall serve the Lord."