Dreher endorses Huckabee

A reader told me that Rod Dreher at his Crunchy Con blog has been talking a lot about Mike Huckabee lately. Today Dreher endorsed Huckabee for president. I guess Dreher didn’t see the December 9 interview (see brief clip here) in which Huckabee says that under his plan, illegals would go home, then return to the U.S. legally within “days.”

But what am I saying? Why should Dreher care? Dreher, as I have clearly established from his personal endorsement of the Dallas Morning News essay declaring the Illegal Alien to be the Texan of the Year (and no one has refuted my point, including Dreher), implicitly regards all illegal aliens as already Americans. Therefore instant legalization would fit his view perfectly.

- end of initial entry -

A. Gereth writes:

You write: “I guess Dreher didn’t see the December 9 interview (see brief clip here) in which Huckabee says that under his plan, illegals would go home, then return to the U.S. legally within “days.”

Perhaps Dreher interpreted Huckabee’s plan to mean that all “Texans of the Year” actually residing in Texas would be housebound for a few days and all others would go “home” to Texas for a brief stay, before relocating to the other states.

JS writes:

I’ve been aware of Dreher for years from his Corner posts and occasional NR articles.In this article he praises (!) Governor George Ryan of Illinois for commuting 167 death penalty sentences just before leaving office under a criminal charges. That article made me aware that there was something wrong with this guy and made me see that there was something wrong with NR as well. Dreher like others at NR called himself a conservative but thinks like a liberal. It seems that opposition to abortion or gay marriage or one other issue that deviates from orthodox liberalism makes a bleeding heart liberal a conservative. Gay “conservative” Deroy Murdock was another, as were “JPod” and Ponnoru and many others. NR is not worth wasting mental energy thinking about nor are its writers.

LA replies:

What JS has just pointed to is the basis definition of a “conservative” in our age: a person who dissents from libealism on one or two or three issues, but who, apart from those issues, accepts the basic premises and world view of liberalism.

Also, Deroy Murdock is not a conservative, doesn’t call himself one. He’s a libertarian. (He’s also an atheist who thinks society should get rid of religion.) I was not aware he had publicly stated that he is homosexual.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 11, 2008 10:46 AM | Send