Michael Gaynor
January 16, 2008
Ann Coulter versus Mike Huckabee
By Michael Gaynor

Voters need to take a few minutes to reflect: Huck CAN disarm with his country boy charm, but he's what Laura Ingraham called him a huckster and no match for Ann Coulter.
________________________________________

Ann Coulter on Huck:

"He supports a nationwide smoking ban anyplace where people work, constitutional protection for sodomy, big government, higher taxes and government benefits for illegal aliens. According to my calculations, that puts him about three earmarks away from being Nancy Pelosi.

"Liberals take a perverse pleasure in touting Huckabee because they know he will give them everything they want big government and a Christian they can roll."

Ann's father recently died and her latest column is a very fitting tribute to him.

Instead of Americans sending her flowers, I think Ann would be happier if those who had not already done so give her belatedly the Christmas present for which she asked in her "Liberals Sing 'Huckalujah'" article: "All I want for Christmas is for Christians to listen to what Mike Huckabee says, rather than what the media say about him. The mainstream media keep flogging Huckabee for being a Christian, apparently unaware that this 'God' fellow is testing through the roof in focus groups."

It's a reasonable request and Ann made it because she realizes that "Huckabee is a 'compassionate conservative' only in the sense that calling him a conservative is being compassionate.

Last month, a couple of weeks before the Iowa caucuses, Ann targeted Huck in an even more devastating analysis that usual article titled, sweetly, "There's a Huckabee Born Every Minute." Ann exquisitely explained why Huck is "the evangelical liberals like": "Liberals adore Huckabee because he fits their image of what an evangelical should be: stupid and easily led."

The former Arkansas Governor seems to be on the same page with Ann in rejecting Darwinian evolution, but Ann really means it and Huck made the mistake of "rush[ing] to assure [Larry] King that he has no interest in altering textbooks that foist this fraud on innocent schoolchildren."

Huck confused Ann, and HE was the problem.

Ann:

"I don't understand that. Does Huckabee believe Darwinism is a hoax or not? If he knows it's a fraud, then why does he want it taught to schoolchildren? What other discredited mystery religions as mathematician David Berlinski calls Darwinism does Huckabee want to teach children? Sorcery? Phrenology? Alchemy?

"Admittedly, the truth about Darwinism would be jarring in textbooks that promote other frauds and hoaxes, such as 'man-made global warming.' Why confuse the little tykes with fact-based textbooks?"

Ann would not let Huck get away with what, at best, is fuzzy thinking.

Especially on sodomy and the Constitution.

Ann: "Huckabee claims he opposes gay marriage and says Scalia is his favorite justice, but he supports a Supreme Court decision denounced by Scalia for paving the way to a 'constitutional right' to gay marriage. I guess Huckabee is one of those pro-sodomy, pro-gay marriage, pro-evolution evangelical Christians."

Huck simultaneously courting the votes of proponents of homosexual sex and admirers of United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia IS amusing AND absurd.

Ann not only mocked Huck, but explained why Huck is absurd as well as amusing.

"...Huckabee has said he agrees with the Supreme Court's lunatic opinion that sodomy is a constitutional right.

"In the 2003 decision Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court overruled Bowers v. Hardwick, a case only 17 years old (and with a name chosen by God) despite the allegedly hallowed principle of 'stare decisis.' As explained in [Ann's book] Godless, stare decisis means: 'What's mine is mine and what's yours is negotiable.'

"Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion in Lawrence was so insane that the lower courts completely ignored it. Since then, courts have disregarded Lawrence in order to uphold state laws banning the sale of vibrators, restricting gays' rights to adopt, prohibiting people from having sex with their adult ex-stepchildren, and various other basic human rights specifically mentioned in our Constitution.

"Lawrence was promptly denounced not only by Republican governors and Christian groups across the nation, but also by anyone with sufficient reading comprehension skills to see that the Constitution says nothing about a right to sodomy.

"But when Huckabee was asked about this jaw-dropping ruling from the high court, he said the majority opinion 'probably was appropriate.'

"He made these remarks on his monthly radio show, 'Ask the Governor,' as was widely reported at the time, including a July 3, 2003, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette article titled, 'Huckabee Says Sex Lives of Adults Not State Affair.' I stress that 'Ask the Governor' was not a wacky, comedy-based, morning zoo-type radio program. It was supposed to be serious."

But that's nonsense, as Ann deftly demonstrated.

"Employing the ACLU's 'any law I don't like is unconstitutional' test, Huckabee said he supported the court's decision because a law 'that prohibited private behavior among adults' would be difficult to enforce. Next he'll be telling us which of the Ten Commandments he considers 'nonstarters.'

"How about adults who privately operate meth labs? How about a private contract between an employer and employee for a salary less than the minimum wage?

"Hey! How about adults privately smoking cigarettes in their homes? Nope, Huckabee wants a federal law banning smoking but thinks state laws banning sodomy are 'probably' unconstitutional.

"Justice Antonin Scalia wrote a spirited dissent in Lawrence, joined by Justices William Rehnquist and Clarence Thomas, raising the somewhat embarrassing point that homosexual sodomy is not technically mentioned in the Constitution. Otherwise, our Founding Fathers would have been our 'Founding Life Partners.'

"Scalia said that inasmuch as the Texas law furthered 'the same interest furthered by criminal laws against fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality and obscenity,' the court's ruling placed all these laws in jeopardy.

"Most important, Scalia said: 'Today's opinion dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permitted a distinction to be made between heterosexual and homosexual unions.' At least no court has tried to legalize gay marriage since that 2003 ruling, so we can be grateful for Hey, wait a minute!"

Huck tried to excuse his radio opinion after Ann highlighted it, only to give an excuse that Ann immediately used to show that that Huck as Pres would be dangerous.

Ann:

"He responded to my column last week pointing out that he is on record supporting the Supreme Court's sodomy-is-a-constitutional-right decision by saying that he was relying on the word of a caller to his radio show and didn't know the details of the case. Ironically, that's how most people feel about sodomy: They support it until they hear the details.

"First, I'd pay a lot of money to hear how a court opinion finding that sodomy is a constitutional right could be made to sound reasonable. But the caller had the right response when Huckabee asked him, 'What's your favorite radio station?' So he seemed like a reliable source.

"Second, Huckabee's statement that he agreed with the court's sodomy ruling was made one week after the decision. According to Nexis, in that one week, the sodomy decision had been the cover story on every newspaper in the country, including The New York Times. It was the talk of all the Sunday news programs. It had been denounced by every conservative and Christian group in America as well as other random groups of sane individuals having no conservative inclinations whatsoever.

"The highest court in the land had found sodomy was a constitutional right! That sort of thing tends to make news. (I was going to say the sodomy ruling got publicity up the wazoo, but this is, after all, Christmas week.)

"So this little stretch-marked cornpone is either lying, has a closed head injury, is a complete ignoramus or all of the above."

It sure seems like Huck won't be getting a financial contribution from Ann!

Voters need to take a few minutes to reflect: Huck CAN disarm with his country boy charm, but he's what Laura Ingraham called him a huckster and no match for Ann Coulter.

© Michael Gaynor

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Michael Gaynor

Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member... (more)

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Michael Gaynor: Click here

Latest articles

August 27, 2014
When did President Obama know that the "lost" Lois Lerner email wasn't lost?


August 18, 2014
The truth about the late Michael Brown is NOT a smear


August 11, 2014
Will federal district court judge Reggie Walton save or shatter Obamaworld?


August 8, 2014
Like the Obama admininstration, Mississippi GOP targeting True the Vote for promoting election integrity


August 6, 2014
Will the current "Mississippi Madness" sink Mitch Mcconnell?


August 5, 2014
Attorney Larry Friedman uses Fox & Friends to rail against federal trial judge Richard Kyle in Jesse Ventura defamation case


July 31, 2014
ESPN owes Stephen A. Smith an apology


July 29, 2014
Mississippians (including Chris McDaniel) deserve an accurate count of the legal votes


July 27, 2014
Election results should be trued, not skewed, Judge Atlas


July 24, 2014
Obamacare, brought to you by President Humpty Dumpty, master of words


More articles