The ebb and flow of political shifts is an interesting thing to study. The first Democrats called themselves Republicans (Thomas Jefferson) and they resemble more Libertarians than they do modern-day Democrats. Republicans began as strong on centralized government (Abraham Lincoln) and then shifted toward isolationist defenders of domestic corporatism. That description now resembles many Democrats today.
Conservatism used to mean limited government intervention and a desire to stay out of "no-win wars" and the military adventurism of post-World War 2 politics. Now apparently conservatism has been redefined once again. It finds itself now for many embodied in the former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.
If Mike Huckabee represents a newly remodeled conservatism then I must finally and firmly plant myself in the liberal camp. Governor Huckabee is not worthy of my vote...or yours.
Aside from Mike Huckabee's failures as Governor which are many (soft on crime, raised taxes, corrupt government, et al) which will come out more and more in his campaign as he continues to be in contention for the GOP nomination. His personal religious belief is my largest contention and I have more concern for it than I do Mr. Romney's.
Let me first explain that I know a great deal about Mr. Huckabee's theological background. I've heard him speak to it and I've listened closely to the subtext of many of his public comments.
Where Mike Huckabee goes wrong is where he actually goes against traditional Baptist teaching in his approach to government. Early Baptists were known as Separatists. They very much invented the terms "Separation of Church and State." Baptists confessions going back 400 years go on at great length on how a free church must exist within a free state. The recent edition of the doctrinal statement of the Southern Baptist Convention states in one area: "The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work."
Mike Huckabee's domestic and foreign policy stem from a worldview shaped in pre-millennial eschatology (end times). It not only shapes his view of the role of entitlements and social programs but also the imperative need to protect and aid Israel. Keep in mind that to some degree this steered Bill Clinton as well. Though not seemingly as devout or as "traditional" in his Christian walk, Bill's foundation in faith stems from this same persuasion. Don't lump Hillary in with him though...her background in Wesleyan Methodist theology is a whole different breed.
On these grounds I believe Mike Huckabee is not worthy of a free pass on his religious beliefs. Mitt Romney has been torn apart because of the word "Mormonism" with no regard to what it means from a public policy standpoint. It only comes up within the context of whether "southern evangelicals" will back a man who comes from a non-Trinitarian church (and the wacky holy underwear...just sayin').
A man that thinks that the "least of these" should be cared for with government intervention by stealing money from me and you in the form of taxes is neither virtuous nor holy. A man that is willing to act on foreign policy based upon bubble gum end times theology should NEVER, EVER be elected president. EVER!
Any other reason you come up with not to vote for him is one I would probably agree with, but I thought I'd throw this out there since you probably won't read it anywhere else.
Note: One area I will defend the Huckster was on his answer regarding the role of men and women in Christian marriage according to the SBC doctrinal statement. He rightly pointed out where it was misconstrued and that its core directive was to teach how to love. Just wanted to throw that in too...I can be fair sometimes.