I didn’t mention Huckabee in my earlier endorsement of Fred Thompson even though, much to many people’s surprise, he appears to be surging. I’m reluctant to consider him a first-tier candidate and so did not mention him in my rundown of the rest of the Big Four. My primary reason for discounting him early on was his nanny-state approach with things like the ridiculous national smoking ban. But if you’re thinking Huckabee, take a good hard look at Slublog’s detailed assessment and Gib’s layout of a troubling incident, and then tell me why it’s a good idea to vote for somebody who may sound more fervent on abortion and other moral issues than Thompson but who, even if elected, will have no more real power to affect those issues than the mechanisms Thompson has already outlined–while at the same time he’s a big spender who, because of his evangelical appeal, will have a lot more trouble beating Hillary. I disagree with Slublog in that I don’t think it’s a Big Government menace to end what should clearly be a crime (abortion) at the federal level, but I do think the first step down that road will only be taken through federalism and returning the power to the states until the voices denouncing the crime become loud and numerous enough that it can become a federal issue. Mike Huckabee talks a good game about short-circuiting that process, but I agree with Thompson’s calculation that federal action at this stage is an unrealistic pipe dream and a bad political risk.

And lest we forget, Huckabee consistently called multitudes of Republican voters racist for wanting an end to illegal immigration because (paraphrased from an earlier debate), “I’ve seen it, I’ve talked to people.” As I’ve said before, I ain’t his Huckaberry and I hope these polls are wrong in showing how many of my fellow Christians are becoming so.