Left-Leaning Male Pundits Heart Huckabee

Have you noticed how liberal white male reporters get crushes on right-wing male candidates? For years John McCain had Democratic and even left men swooning at his feet--a straight talker! A war hero! He's cool and macho, and he'll invite you over for barbecue! Never mind that McCain was basically a militaristic reactionary with occasional twinges of sanity. Even at The Nation, McCain was a popular guy with the guys. in 2004, one of my Nation colleagues argued in an edit meeting that the magazine should endorse him.

This time round, the so-called-liberal-media men's Republican sweetheart is Mike Huckabee. He plays the bass guitar! He cares! He's not a total maniac like the other evangelical Christians even though he doesn't believe in evolution and probably thinks you're going to Hell! Ari Berman declares him " humble, decent, and funny." In The New Yorker, Rick Hertzberg is surprised to find himself charmed: Huckabee is "funny," "reassuringly ordinary" in appearance and demeanor, "curiously unthreatening" in affect; he speaks "calmly" and declines to serve up "red meat" on abortion, immigration, the Clintons, and other issues dear to rightwingers' hearts.

Marc Cooper, who can't throw enough rotten tomatoes at Democrats and "progressives," or as he likes to call them "pwogwessives," writes in his blog that Huckabee " radiates a core decency." Newsweek's Jonathan Alter: He "speaks American." (oh lord, where's Mencken when you need him?) "Even on faith and politics, Mike is easy to like." Really? It's easy to like a man who tells Bill Maher that "we really don't know" whether the earth is six thousand or six billion years old? Who doesn't think human beings are primates? Who wants to outlaw almost all abortion because "life begins at conception"? Gail Collins-- yes, yes, not all Huckabee fans are men -- thinks indeed, it is.

Hertzberg ruminates so pleasantly on Huckabee's sympathy for the poor, his attacks on the Club for Growth, his lack of the spit-flecked viciousness that has characterized so many religious wingnuts, that you almost forget Huckabee is a religious wingnut himself. Only in his second to last paragraph does Hertzberg get around to acknowledging that "None of this is to say that Huckabee's policy positions are much better than those of his Republican rivals; in some cases, they're worse. He wants to replace the federal tax code with a gigantic, horribly regressive sales tax; he cannot name a single time he has ever disagreed with the National Rifle Association; he wants to amend the Constitution to ban gay marriage and abortion." But not to worry: "In practice, however, the sales tax and the amendments would go nowhere, and he couldn't do much about abortion except appoint Scalia-like Justices to the Supreme Court--which his rivals have promised to do, too."

Just so you know: One of Huckabee's first acts as governor of Arkansas was to bar state Medicaid from paying for an abortion for a retarded teenager raped by her stepfather, despite federal regulations requiring such payments. Is that your idea of a nice, decent, "curiously unthreatening guy ? As Todd Gitlin writes at TPMcafe, the media relentless scrutinizes the health-care plans of the Democratic candidates, but when Republicans say they want to ban abortion and declare that life "begins at conception,"--anti-choice code for banning most methods of contraception -- they get a free pass, including from the so-called liberal media.

Is there some weird masochism operating here, whereby left-leaning men, weary of failure and scorn, roll over for rightwingers who smile and throw them a bone? Does the issue of abortion-- which is a marker for a whole range of women's issues--just not matter to them the way it does to women with the same politics? Are they so desperate for a candidate who uses the language of "economic populism," --when he isn't pushing regressive taxation-- that they'll overlook everything else? Which is more likely: a Republican president who limits women's access to abortion, or a Republican president who limits laissez-faire capitalism? The question answers itself. I just wish more liberal male pundits were asking it.

UPDATE: Marc Cooper e mailed me to say he felt I quoted him out of context and am a good example of the "pwogwessives" he despises. He also called my attention to this staggering breaking news story from Murray Waas on the Huffington Post, a story Marc helped edit and has linked to on his blog. Be sure to check it out -- it's truly horrific.

NOTE: Apologies to John Nichols, to whom I originally attributed Ari Berman's quote. Far from being charmed by Huckabee, Nichols wrote a persuasive post on this website attacking him for applying religious tests to Romney. And before anyone else writes in to point out that the pundits I mentioned were discussing Huckabee's public persona, not his character, "decent" is a moral term that describes someone's actual character as expressed in action, not their social manners as expressed in an interview or debate. It's not a synonym for "affable," "pleasant," or "seemingly not insane, despite adherence to nutty beliefs about imminent end of world etc."

Comments (53)

1. Two points, Ms Pollitt

   1. Do you REALLY think there are no liberal ladies who liked "Maverick John"?

   2. "John Nichols declares him " humble, decent, and funny." Well, don't take anything HE says too serious. He's predicted impeachment, a "Chuck Hagel/Mike Bloomberg" "unity ticket", and how Hillary's chances will be hurt if she doesn't come out and tell us how people don't like her!

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 12/05/2007 @ 4:16pm

2. What we really need is for everyone to stop making judgments based on personalities or appeareances alone and start actually looking at policies of candidates. Of course, we will keep saying that and the mainstream media will continue to do what is easiest... great article once again Katha.

   Posted by citylady at 12/05/2007 @ 4:19pm

3. Posted by ZERO 12/05/2007 @ 4:14pm

   Uh-oh, Ms Pollitt mentioned something vaguely "feminist"....ZERO good for 3-5 posts now on it!

   Ya think ZERO tried to ask out Tammy Bruce and when she turned him down he put it to her being "one of them damn feminist"?

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 12/05/2007 @ 4:20pm

4. I don't think anyone on the left is saying we should favor Huckabee over any Democrat. I think the point is that he is "a little" more refreshing than the standard warmongering, selfish, compassionless, civil rights abuser, rich guy that you see with most Republicans.

   Posted by Metteyya at 12/05/2007 @ 4:51pm

5. Katha- Maybe pundits on the left and right are attracted to Huckabee because they aren't one-issue zealots like you appear to be. There is so much more to life than where one falls on the Pro-Choice/Pro-Life spectrum. Try to step back and observe the full measure of the man. You might then be better equipped to ascertain what othere find attractive in him.

   Posted by vertigoskippy at 12/05/2007 @ 5:14pm

6. "Who doesn't think human beings are primates?

   Me! I don't compare myself to some stinking monkeys or apes. Although I did date a knuckledragger my first year in college, once...omg, that was an experience!...

   Posted by ACook at 12/05/2007 @ 5:22pm

7. Posted by METTEYYA 12/05/2007 @ 4:51pm

   As if the dems are any better...

   Posted by ACook at 12/05/2007 @ 5:24pm

8. Things are much, much worse with Huckabee. Look at Huffingtonpost.com [huffingtonpost.com] for the update.

   A scandal had been aired regarding Huckabee's release of a serial rapist who went on to rape and murder again. I thought this was going to be Dukakis redux but given the disarray of all the Repubs thought it wouldn't be a big deal as an issue.

   The revelation is that the 17-year-old girl who was raped was actually a distant relative of Bill Clinton and her parents were prominent Clinton supporters. There is a very good chance that the rapist's commutation was a vicious, inhuman act prompted by Clinton hatred from the right wing; their approach was to deny that the rape actually happened and set the rapist free as a victim of Clinton abuse of power, even though many victims of the perpetrator personally contacted Huckabee and urged him to not release the bastard. The criminal went on to rape and murder at least one other woman.

   This is not a crime of being a bad bureacrat or a soft-on-crime governor; this is vicious, despicable stuff from this so-called Christian. I guess I was also guilty of a little uninformed tolerance for this guy due to his pretense of compassionate populism - more like Buchanan than McCain I think. But make no mistake, Huckabee's a monster, or at best allowed himself to be the puppet of monsters. Democrats, know what you're up against.

   Posted by ccorbell at 12/05/2007 @ 6:25pm

9. I have three theories for why some liberals like or at least pretend to like Huckabee.

   (1) My first theory is that some liberal commentators are warming up to Huckabee for exactly the same reason as Karl Rove is warming up to Obama: They are trying to divide up the political right by puffing up the reputation of a supposedly "underdog" candidate. If Huckabee makes a strong showing in the primaries, but ultimately loses to Giuliani, then these liberals hope that quite a few social conservatives will simply stay home rather than vote for a man whom they regard as frighteningly friendly to homosexuals.

   (2) My second theory is less flattering for us liberals. It's that we're so desperate to give every bit of news an "optimistic" spin that we are eager to believe that Huckabee is popular for all the right reasons, such as because he hates NAFTA and is not absolutely opposed to taxes, but not for any wrong ones, such as because he hates immigrants, favors only regressive taxes, regards homosexuals as second-class citizens at best, and eagerly aims to criminalize abortion.

   I believe a steady diet of political speechifying is probably harmful for liberal journalists and pundits alike. It makes them increasingly unable to distinguish truth from appearances. Sure, every politician SOUNDS populist. But "Thou shalt sound like a populist" is the very first rule in the plutocrats' playbook and has been at least since the Reagan days. Really BEING a populist in the honorable sense means doing what's in the real interest of the people. The accurate identification of a populist in this sense demands not that we listen to what politicians say in their speeches, but what they do after they are elected to public office. The old East German saying is worth repeating: "Don't look at politicians' lips. Look at their hands."

   The temptation during campaign season is to try to predict the future by examining the present, particularly in the form of campaign speeches. We would do much better if we examined the past, particularly past voting records, in order to educate people to make better decisions when they vote.

   (3) My third explanation for why liberals pretend to have a soft spot for Huckabee is that we liberals are very touchy about our reputation for plain niceness. We're not supposed to hate ANYBODY, no matter how contemptible he or she may be. The conservatives are fond of taunting that we criticize Bush only because we "hate" him, not because he is a reprehensible, preening, self-serving, fear-mongering, mendacious, hypocritical tyrant. So maybe liberals profess that they like Huckabee merely in order to shore up their reputation for niceness. Our niceness is supposed to entitle us to some credibility when we actually roll up our sleeves and start pointing out everything that's WRONG with these Republican candidates, despite their superficial chumminess. "Sure, I like him, but of course I can't vote for a sexist, homophobic, xenophobic embryo-rights fanatic, even if he does have a nice sense of humor."

   The problem with this warm-up exercise in "niceness" is that it takes a long time to work up to the actual hard-hitting and effective criticism that it's supposed to prepare us to do. If we never get to that criticism, or if don't get to it until page B17, then the warm-up remains just that: a "warming up" that is an exercise in both insincerity and futility.

   Posted by JakobFabian at 12/05/2007 @ 6:27pm

10. Unlike Governor Huckabee, I am tempted simply to accept geologists' claims regarding the age of the earth. Surely, scientific knowledge is supposed to depend on the critical and public revision of theories and experimental data. Yet "Funes el memorioso" by Borges would be, by comparison, emblematic of an active life if one were carefully to examine the tenability of every idea, belief and opinion. In any event, the geological record is less significant than a scandalous fact, namely that the dominant species on earth has not managed to begin to grow up.

    Posted by ALPI at 12/05/2007 @ 6:45pm

11. Thank you so much for pointing this out. I couldn't figure out why I was reading so many articles in The Nation lauding Huckabee, the homophobic, mysoginistic candidate who promotes everything this publication is against. Reading those articles was like reading the Twilight Zone version of The Nation.

    Posted by tdp001 at 12/05/2007 @ 6:45pm

12. Posted by CCORBELL 12/05/2007 @ 6:25pm

    CC, let the blame go where it should..the parole board. They, and only they, are responsible for letting Wayne Dumond out. I should know, my brother Johnathan was killed by 2 parolees from the state Michigan. One of them had an attempted murder conviction already under his belt. They got released on "good behavior".

    Those sorry rat bastards didn't have the courage to apologise to my parents in person, they sent a cold letter instead.

    BTW, Governors can only give pardons.

    Posted by ACook at 12/05/2007 @ 7:37pm

13. Posted by JAKOBFABIAN 12/05/2007 @ 6:27pm

    Note to Jakob, liberals are no better. They're just as hateful, just as nasty, just as self-serving, just as reprehensible, big time hypocrites, liers, cheats, and a host of other unsavory things.

    Posted by ACook at 12/05/2007 @ 7:47pm

14. ACOOK:

    You said:

    Note to Jakob, liberals are no better. They're just as hateful, just as nasty, just as self-serving, just as reprehensible, big time hypocrites, liers, cheats, and a host of other unsavory things.

    My response:

    Certainly some are just as bad as conservatives. But I would recommend reading John Dean's trio of books regarding conservatives (especially the second in the series, Conservatives Without Conscience) before making such a claim as you have made. There are demonstrable differences between the current crop of conservatives and liberals. Liberals GENERALLY are much less likely to be so vitriolic, vituperous, and personal in their attacks on conservatives (just compare Air America, Randi Rhodes notwithstanding, to the bevy of conservative talk radio personalities for more examples than I could ever possibly name here).

    And besides, two wrongs don't make it right. Your moral equivocation is simply more proof that you know you're wrong, and you just feel the need to assuage your knowledge of that error with indignant finger-pointing and stone-throwing.

    Posted by jorcheim at 12/05/2007 @ 8:01pm

15. ACOOK:

    You said:

    BTW, Governors can only give pardons.

    My response:

    Um... he was governor.

    Posted by jorcheim at 12/05/2007 @ 8:04pm

16. Posted by ACOOK 12/05/2007 @ 5:22pm

    Why not? I'm rather PROUD of the fact great-great-great-great (13,000 greats)-grand-dad learned to walk upright to see across the high savannah grass and avoid the leopards.

    Better than thinking humans have made NO progress since two dumb kids ate a pomegranate they weren't supposed to and a lunatic god tossed them out of an arboretum.

    Posted by Mask at 12/05/2007 @ 8:15pm

17. MASK:

    Actually, it was a fig. LOL... sorry, just being an ass tonight.

    Posted by jorcheim at 12/05/2007 @ 8:16pm

18. (just compare Air America, Randi Rhodes notwithstanding, to the bevy of conservative talk radio personalities for more examples than I could ever possibly name here).----Posted by JORCHEIM 12/05/2007 @ 8:01pm

    Uh, JORCH...I do. Listen to AAR on XM. It's not just the interminably paranoid and shrill Ms Rhodes. Listen to Sam Seder or Mike Malloy...as vicious as they come. Or "Lionel" who also indulges the conspiracy theorist Left and makes his bones on being a 'left-libertarian Limbaugh'.

    Political ideology is NOT an immunity to being a nut or lout.

    Posted by Mask at 12/05/2007 @ 8:18pm

19. MASK:

    Progress... wait, does that mean that we actually do something on our own, without God coming down and giving it to us? I don't buy it... that smacks of HERESY!!!!

    LOL this is fun, trying to be a right-wing crazy.

    Posted by jorcheim at 12/05/2007 @ 8:19pm

20. sorry, just being an ass tonight.

    Posted by JORCHEIM 12/05/2007 @ 8:16pm

    But you're a liberal and they're "nicer"?!?!?!?....heheh

    Posted by Mask at 12/05/2007 @ 8:19pm

21. MASK:

    I agree regarding your comments about being a lout or a nut. However, it is fairly obvious that the "liberals" only got so nasty as a direct result of the conservative attack dogs. Thank Newt Gingrich, thank Tom DeLay, thank Rush Limbaugh... hell, thank Cheney and Bush for that matter.

    I am not saying that there is no animosity or churlish behavior on the part of liberals. There is, and they should be ashamed of themselves. And it should end immediately.

    But let's not forget who started this whole carnival of chaos here.

    Posted by jorcheim at 12/05/2007 @ 8:21pm

22. MASK:

    We've had this discussion... I am not a liberal. I am, however, an asshole... but only because I am unabashed at how stridently I point out how wrong others are. Generally, I am quite the congenial one.

    Posted by jorcheim at 12/05/2007 @ 8:23pm

23. But let's not forget who started this whole carnival of chaos here. ----Posted by JORCHEIM 12/05/2007 @ 8:21pm

    Again, I think that's a matter of subjectivity. Seems the "Golden Age of Bipartisanship" all the Democrats talk about meant one thing...

    Dems set the agenda, and if the Repubs are nice, they get to put their names on the bills.

    Posted by Mask at 12/05/2007 @ 8:32pm

24. I am, however, an asshole...Posted by JORCHEIM 12/05/2007 @ 8:23pm

    A party I would happily join.....

    (easy opening for HSUB or WILL...heheh)

    Posted by Mask at 12/05/2007 @ 8:33pm

25. MASK:

    The atmosphere on the Hill has never been as poisonous at it was before last November. That was the case from 1994 til that time. Before 1994, while the Democrats were in power, tis true, there was always an atmosphere of collegiality there. That has not been the case since the Republicans under Gingrich, then DeLay, were in charge.

    Posted by jorcheim at 12/05/2007 @ 8:37pm

26. BTW, Governors can only give pardons.

    Posted by ACOOK 12/05/2007 @ 7:37pm

    No, that's not all Governors do. Governors can talk to parole boards and apply pressure on high-profile cases. Did the Governor do that in your case? He (Huckabee) did in this one. From the HuffingtonPost article (doesn't anyone follow links any more?):

    "But, according to Reeves, Huckabee actually told the parole board members that the prison sentence meted out to Dumond for his rape conviction was "outlandish" and "way out of bounds for his crime." Huckabee believed there "was something nefarious" about the how the state's criminal justice system had treated Dumond, Reeves said."

    ....

    "In a 2002 story I wrote for the Arkansas Times about Huckabee's role in freeing Dumond, four board members -- three of whom spoke on the record -- said that Huckabee lobbied and pressured board members on the matter. This included the 1996 parole meeting at which the board's recording secretary -- who ordinarily tapes the entire sessions -- was asked to leave the room. Several board members and members of the state legislature have said the secret session violated state law."

    Naturally Huckabee denies it.

    Posted by ccorbell at 12/05/2007 @ 9:14pm

27. BELIEFS TRUMP PERSONALITY...

    As usual, Katha Pollitt is dead on. If anything, because of his beliefs, Mike Huckabee strikes me as actually a lot LESS appealing than the other Republican candidates, even...well, even ALL of them (which isn't saying much). How about this as a nickname -- "The Huckster"?...

    Posted by w_m_bear at 12/05/2007 @ 9:39pm

28. Me! I don't compare myself to some stinking monkeys or apes.

    Posted by ACOOK 12/05/2007 @ 5:22pm

    well, they probably think you stink.

    they do have a much better sense of smell.

    prove mr. darwin wrong, please.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 12/05/2007 @ 10:07pm

29. Posted by JORCHEIM 12/05/2007 @ 8:01pm

    What kind of job do you have that allows you listen to talk radio? I don't have that luxuary at my job.

    Posted by ACook at 12/05/2007 @ 11:27pm

30. "Why not? I'm rather PROUD of the fact great-great-great-great (13,000 greats)-grand-dad learned to walk upright to see across the high savannah grass and avoid the leopards."

    Like I said, who am I to judge?

    "Better than thinking humans have made NO progress since two dumb kids ate a pomegranate they weren't supposed to and a lunatic god tossed them out of an arboretum."

    Well, you know more about what fruit they ate then I do, because scripture never said what the fruit was. Besides why are you bashing a story you don't believe in?

    Posted by MASK 12/05/2007 @ 8:15pm

    Posted by ACook at 12/05/2007 @ 11:37pm

31. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 12/05/2007 @ 10:07pm

    I can't speak for anyone here but myself. But, I'll tell you this much, I was created in the image of the living God, not some nasty smelly animals who pick through and eat it's own feces.

    BTW, I do respect Darwin and his theories.

    Posted by ACook at 12/05/2007 @ 11:48pm

32. Posted by CCORBELL 12/05/2007 @ 9:14pm

    In the case of my brother, it was the parole board who let them out. The governor had nothing to do with it.

    To me, when a parole board screws up like they do so often, I'm not surprised when they won't take responsibility for letting a very dangerous criminal go. It's everybody else's fault but their own. I'm of the belief that parole boards should be done away with. If a crimnal wants to be paroled, let the judge who put them away in the first place do it.

    Posted by ACook at 12/06/2007 @ 12:01am

33. Posted by ACOOK 12/05/2007 @ 11:48pm

    so why did the human maker make monkeys et al.?

    they sure look like us.

    would they be the maker's test runs?

    and what about them scrunched up skulls they keep finding off in kenya underneath a whole pile of rocks?

    if the maker made us in the maker's image, why do we all look different?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 12/06/2007 @ 01:05am

34. Actually, the original Hebrew scriptures do make clear that it was a fig tree. The whole idea of the apple being plucked from the tree is a well-worn mistranslation.

    But there again, the whole story of the Garden of Eden is pretty obviously allegorical in nature.

    Posted by jorcheim at 12/06/2007 @ 04:08am

35. Posted by ACOOK 12/05/2007 @ 11:37pm

    If I say giant lumberjacks and blue oxen aren't a basis for determining how the 1000 Lakes region of Minnesota were created...

    am I "bashing" that story by saying it's silly?

    Posted by Mask at 12/06/2007 @ 10:38am

36. For the last 8 years, we have had a born-again Christian in the White House, who only listens to right-wing sources, and is easily manipulated to bring about a disastrous war. Do we want another President like that?

    Juan Cole, history professor at Univ. Michigan, comments on his blog (www.juancole.com) that Huckabee didn't know about the new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that Iran didn't have a nuclear weapons program. Instead, Huckabee had been briefed that Iran was accelerating their (alleged) nuclear weapons program, which of course Huckabee was sure they had. Cole called Huckabee "A deer in the headlights", and comments that Huckabee "doesn't a) show good judgment in valuing right wing political gossip over an extensively vetted professional intelligence report (which is corroborated by the International Atomic Energy Agency). And b) he doesn't seem very well informed about the nuclear issue."

    Cole's final verdict: Huckabee is "Not ready for prime time".

    And I agree.

    Posted by NevadaNed at 12/06/2007 @ 11:37am

37. Thank you, Katha, for going to bat against all the fawning portraits of Huckabee. He, like all the other Republicans, would probably prefer to see women pregnant, barefoot, and baking cookies without the freedom to choose otherwise.

    I wonder how much of their Hillary-hatred is linked solely to her status as an outspoken woman.

    --Rashi Kesarwani

    Posted by Nation Intern at 12/06/2007 @ 12:24pm

38. if the maker made us in the maker's image, why do we all look different?

    Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 12/06/2007 @ 01:05am

    Geez, Frosty, could you handle looking at the same 'ol "you" all day long? I mean your wife would look like you, your son would look like you. The neighbors would look like you, even your bandmates would look like you...

    Posted by ACook at 12/06/2007 @ 12:41pm

39. "Who doesn't think human beings are primates?

    "Me! I don't compare myself to some stinking monkeys or apes. Although I did date a knuckledragger my first year in college, once...omg, that was an experience!..."

    Posted by ACOOK 12/05/2007 @ 5:22pm | ignore this person Then you are ignorant, and should not be taken seriously on any issue more important than rock collecting. Oh wait, that may be a bit too weighty since you probably don't "believe" in geology either.

    Posted by entropy at 12/06/2007 @ 12:43pm

40. Posted by MASK 12/06/2007 @ 10:38am

    Is nothing ever sacred to you?!....(hehehe)

    Posted by ACook at 12/06/2007 @ 12:45pm

41. I wish that all the religious lunatics who insist on denying science would deny themselves the benefit of utilizing all it has wrought.

    Posted by entropy at 12/06/2007 @ 12:45pm

42. Newsflash captain dipshit- YOU ARE A PRIMATE! It doesn't matter if you "believe" it or not. Why don't you do everyone a favor- stop "believing" in gravity and walk off a cliff.

    Posted by entropy at 12/06/2007 @ 12:47pm

43. Posted by ENTROPY 12/06/2007 @ 12:43pm

    That's fine by me. I won't hold against you if you believe your ancestors were monkeys/apes, who am I to judge?

    Posted by ACook at 12/06/2007 @ 12:53pm

44. Those digits you just used to type that inane blather- guess what moron they are a product of evolution. I am getting real sick of these flat earth douchebags regurgitating their idiot, insipid thoughts onto these boards. Like I said before, maybe these dipshits are so loathe to "believe" in evolution because they themselves have seen so little benefit.

    Posted by entropy at 12/06/2007 @ 1:01pm

45. Have you ever read The Origin of Species?, The Diversity of Life?, any of Gould's fine tomes? Dawkins? Have you ever read anything more weighty than "people" magazine? I've read your entire tedious bible, so how about you read some books on evolutionary theory before you make a total jackass of yourself in widely read fora? Or even better, take my suggestion and stop "believing" in gravity and go for a nice little vertical stroll off a cliff- you will find your half assed opinions to be quite incapable of superceding physical reality.

    Posted by entropy at 12/06/2007 @ 1:09pm

46. Funny how Pollitts' opinions always fly high over the sea of enlightenment but the opinions of men crash & burn as soon as they deviate from the "correct" course. The article demonstrates the fine art of biting the hand that feeds you, with little acknowledgement of the possible independent thought of her male colleages. Typical chip-on-the-shoulder-feminism.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 12/06/2007 @ 1:18pm

47. ACOOK:

    I am self-employed, a financial planner.

    Posted by jorcheim at 12/06/2007 @ 1:39pm

48. I wonder how much of their Hillary-hatred is linked solely to her status as an outspoken woman.----Posted by NATION INTERN 12/06/2007 @ 12:24pm

    So the Left hates her because.....???

    (Here's where Rashi or friends say "No,no...the reason WE hate her is legitimate (DLC, Repub-lite, supports the war)....the reason THEY hate her is not legitimate (sexism)....we're good and we hate for good reasons....they're bad and they hate for bad reasons....See?")

    Posted by Mask at 12/06/2007 @ 5:01pm

49. Is nothing ever sacred to you?!....(hehehe)----Posted by ACOOK 12/06/2007 @ 12:45pm

    Not myths created by Man (or "men" claiming to be "speaking for God").

    Posted by Mask at 12/06/2007 @ 5:02pm

50. Re Hugh Hewitt, here's another Great Moment From The Blogosphere-- an interview in Texas Monthly with ex-White House Communications Chief Dan Bartlett who outs Hewitt as The Great Regurgitator [texasmonthly.com]):

    TEXAS MONTHLY: What about the blogs?

    BARTLETT: We had to set up a whole new apparatus to deal with the challenges they pose. Are they real journalists? The Washington Post, for example, has journalists who are now bloggers. Do you treat them as bloggers? Do they get credentials?

    TEXAS MONTHLY: Let's think of it as a practical matter. If one of those journalists-turned-bloggers, Chris Cillizza, e-mails you to say he needs an interview, and at the same time one of the Post's print reporters--say, Dan Balz--e-mails you and says he needs an interview, and you can do only one . . .

    BARTLETT: Balz.

    TEXAS MONTHLY: Because the print edition of the Post has more of an impact?

    BARTLETT: Because Balz is on multiple platforms. He's booked more easily on television. He's read by more people. He influences people a bit more. Now, the question might not be as much Chris versus Dan as maybe, "Is it Dan Balz or one of the guys at [the conservative blog] Power Line?"

    TEXAS MONTHLY: Yeah, or what if [conservative blogger] Hugh Hewitt called?

    BARTLETT: That's when you start going, "Hmm . . ." Because they do reach people who are influential. That's what I mean by influential. I mean, talk about a direct IV into the vein of your support. It's a very efficient way to communicate. They regurgitate exactly and put up on their blogs what you said to them. It is something that we've cultivated and have really tried to put quite a bit of focus on.

    Posted by thibaud at 12/06/2007 @ 8:04pm

51. Thank you for reminding us some derogatory facts (I would say, jewels) of Huckabee as:

    1)"I can't tell if the Earth's age is 6,000 years" 2)" we are not primates"... but those are Conservatives's talk show...the most dangerous peril is: 3)"we will replace income tax with the sales tax"!!! As you say, regressive...and compared even to Bush...!

    Huckabee is indeed an authentic and outright figure, at least compared with for example the fake which is Mr. Giuliani or the hypocrisy of Dubya. That does not mean he is comparable in his policies with any of the Dem candidates by any means. Put it in another way, we have been accostumed to such Rep lousy standards that whenever any somehow decent one comes, we think he stands out of the crowd.

    Ms. Pollitt, you stress the different gender perceptions. Women psychological insight? I believe there is some difference between genders sometimes, but they are mixed (gray) perceptions. I believe for example that 'male liberal journalists' are obliged to 'hit on the news' and they might look boring and monotonous criticizing completely all the Rep candidates. On the other side, liberals value originality and coherence and he has this- although he stumbles on such stones. Are liberal women more politicized? I think the conscious ones yes, but they are a much lower fraction than men. Still, this lower fraction make better voters than men, as for example cultivated women are NOT for Hillary whereas less cultivated are for her.

    Finally, the real problem is to always vote because of the ideas, not the personality. This is an extended problem in our country in which even very well educated people are in.

    Posted by Frank42 at 12/07/2007 @ 03:05am

52. It means that, even through he is a syrupy goddomizer, he still aint a lizard.

    that distinguishes him and Ron Paul from the rest of the repubs.

    Lefties know that. Reptilians think think they dangerous extremists.

    Posted by jones at 12/08/2007 @ 01:19am

53. Loved your article. I have been wondering why more reporters do not question Huckabee's religious views. His views are not based on intelligence but are based by a faith with no intelligent review. So the press thinks he is nice, want to barbaque with him,and isn't that special? They also wanted to have a beer with Bush. We have had 7 years with a idiot, I sure don't want another one in the White House.

    Remember what Sinclair Lewis said. "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." American reporters need to remember that quote or we will be doomed to 8 more years of hell.

    Posted by Irene#1 at 12/08/2007 @ 5:06pm