Mark My Words - commentary on news, politics, religion, philosophy, science and social issues

To quote Inygo Montoya - You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Mike Huckabee has spoken lately as if he now grasps the concept of federalism. Previously, Mike Huckabee had unequivocally supported a federal ban on smoking in the workplace. But now his campaign has stated the time isn't right for federal legislation.

Captain ed's analysis reveals Huckabee's thinking, what there is of it:

Huckabee had two problems with the Republican base in this issue, and he hasn't really resolved either one. His initial response gave him a reputation as a nanny-stater, someone who would use the power of government to remove personal choice in the name of protecting people against themselves. Smoking bans have begun to create animosity from private-property advocates who feel that the owners of establishments such as bars and restaurants have the right to serve smokers if they desire.
He didn't really address the federalism issue, either. The retreat from his August 2007 position doesn't say that the previous statement was wrong, but just that the conditions do not exist for the imposition of federal authority on private property. A federalist would say that such conditions rarely exist at all, and only when the interest comes directly from the federal government's attempt to meet its Constitutional duties for national security and interstate commerce. Saying that "sentiment for federal legislation doesn't exist at this time" clearly implies that Huckabee would ignore federalist limitations on action if he could gin up enough sentiment to extend federal power far beyond anything imagined at present.
This response does not address the key problems with Huckabee's earlier stance. It's a flip-flop with only minimal repositioning, which would seem to be the worst of both worlds in this case. Huckabee and his team need to seriously rethink the entire issue and try again. (source)

So now on federalism we have a Huckabee flip and in a manner that also shows his understanding of federalism is so misplaced as to be meaningless except for how meaningful an example it is of his shallow thinking. I know, INCONCEIVABLE, that Mike Huckabee, the Christian leader would pander, have little understanding of the important principles of limited government and help demonstrate that by recently speaking of amending the constitution to be more in line with God.

Again, Inygo Montoya's words come to mind.

Mike Huckabee's efforts to ban smoking in Arkansas make for interesting reading as well. You can find that here.

Regarding this flip and his misunderstanding of federalism, Mike Huckabee earns an F grade. It will be interesting to see if eventually he adds to these three F's with a flop back to his previous nanny state position. Unfortunately, his history in this campaign gives much reason to think that such is not inconceivable and only a matter of time and his being in front of the right crowd, drooling for his pandering shtick.

Previous posts:

Mikey and Chuckie
Who knows Christianity best?
Mike Huckabee - sincerity extraordinaire
Mike Huckabee, the results of service
A fool and his liar are soon parted?
Mike Huckabee - NH Fox News debate
Mike Huckabee - you have a shifty mentality
Mike Huckabee and foreign policy
Mike Huckabee thinks you're stupid
Mike Huckabee - illegal immigration flip flopper?
Huckabee - what kind of preacher is this?
Mike Huckabee - a twofer
Huckabee - Christian leader?
The taming of a shrewd
Evangelicals - short term thinkers?
It's a good thing I'm registered as an independent
Why I don't heart Huckabee