<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Okay, Maybe He&#8217;ll Be Worse Than Bush</title>
	<link>http://larison.org/2008/01/14/okay-maybe-hell-be-worse-than-bush/</link>
	<description>n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: kranza</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2008/01/14/okay-maybe-hell-be-worse-than-bush/#comment-8530</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2008 22:40:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2008/01/14/okay-maybe-hell-be-worse-than-bush/#comment-8530</guid>
					<description>The Wall Street thing is their only difference, and it seems to be *entirely* the reason for the difference in establishment reaction to them.  Otherwise they are certainly the same, and their very close similarity on immigration and the efficacy of government dwarfs any vague difference they may or may not have on other subjects like foreign policy.

The Republican pundits may also dislike Huckabee because of his "arrogant bunker mentality" stuff, but, as you say, the Bush administration once talked like that and they've reverted to something like it in their actions as they try to salvage something on the way out.  Likewise spreading democracy: Bush was against that once too and, whether he admits it or not, everyone is against it again as well.  No, not everyone has given up on hawkish foreign policy, but what assurance does "gates of hell" Huckabee give that he's against that either?  Just some stray rhetoric.

What was that nonsense Bush said the other day?  "I have always told the American people that diplomacy must come first"?  On the Palestinians, Huckabee is talking like a dispensationalist or whatever but that's helpful for his campaign, especially since he's best known for saying alarmingly non-belligerent things elsewhere.  What reason is there to think he won't make the same turns on the subject Bush as done?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Wall Street thing is their only difference, and it seems to be *entirely* the reason for the difference in establishment reaction to them.  Otherwise they are certainly the same, and their very close similarity on immigration and the efficacy of government dwarfs any vague difference they may or may not have on other subjects like foreign policy.</p>
<p>The Republican pundits may also dislike Huckabee because of his &#8220;arrogant bunker mentality&#8221; stuff, but, as you say, the Bush administration once talked like that and they&#8217;ve reverted to something like it in their actions as they try to salvage something on the way out.  Likewise spreading democracy: Bush was against that once too and, whether he admits it or not, everyone is against it again as well.  No, not everyone has given up on hawkish foreign policy, but what assurance does &#8220;gates of hell&#8221; Huckabee give that he&#8217;s against that either?  Just some stray rhetoric.</p>
<p>What was that nonsense Bush said the other day?  &#8220;I have always told the American people that diplomacy must come first&#8221;?  On the Palestinians, Huckabee is talking like a dispensationalist or whatever but that&#8217;s helpful for his campaign, especially since he&#8217;s best known for saying alarmingly non-belligerent things elsewhere.  What reason is there to think he won&#8217;t make the same turns on the subject Bush as done?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
