“The private sector failed to keep up with the demand and so the government stepped in.”

Oh my. kerwin, Hoover and Roosevelt had to destroy the economy in order for the private sector to “fall behind.” Your statement assumes that the government had no part in creating the problem in the first place. Government “stepp[ing] in” and creating the modern welfare state didn’t contribute positively as we all know. I have similar problems with your assumptions as I do with Huckabee’s.

Al…what are you talking about? Notice the words “feeding the MYTH.” Meaning it is not true that Evangelicals (I AM ONE) are “easily led” and unsophisticated. The problem is, Huckabee is presenting himself as “The Christian Candidate” with nothing much beyond that which would appeal to the traditional concerns of the voters he is courting. That he has a terrible fiscal record (fed by the misled economic instincts I have explained at length in this post), has proven himself clueless on foreign policy and (until his newfound Border-Tough image) was La Raza-esque on immigration alienates at least two of the three legs in that “Three-Legged Stool” that makes up the core of the Republican Party and, I’d say the vast majority of the American people. I’d even say that Huckabee saws about 2/3 of that other leg off as well with his idea that government is frequently the solution to social ills traditionally addressed by private faith groups and individuals.

I agree with you that Giuliani’s conduct should disqualify him from the nomination. However, why would Romney’s “privilege” disqualify him? Most presidents have come from advantaged backgrounds. Not only that, just because someone has been born with head start, doesn’t mean he’ll make good necessarily — look at Al Gore’s kid, look at what has happened to half of the Kennedy’s, Marlon Brando’s kids…we can go on. That he has made the most of his life in business and politics cannot be dismissed simply because his dad was also successful. So, to answer your question, I do identify most with Romney (despite my modest station) and support him for the nomination.

I’m curious, what else about Huckabee attracts you beyond shared faith?

That’s the way to win friends and influence people…insult those with whom you disagree by suggesting they are not looking out for the nation’s interests rather than their own personal interests.

I can’t identify with Romney…a priviledged human-being from the cradle to the grave.

Nor Giuliani…who publicly commits adultry before his constituency, his family, and the rest of humanity.

I just can’t identify with these folks.

I can identify with Huckabee…on many more levels than just our shared faith. The author of this piece should consider who it is with whom she/he most closely identifies her/himself.

I believe most government supplied social services can trace their beginning back to the Great Depression. The private sector failed to keep up with the demand and so the government stepped in. That is how a republic tends to work as the people tend to vote for those who appear to benefit them the most. For example those who do not require as many government benefits tend to vote against government benefits unless they feel it is a good way to be charitable.