« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Jon Huntsman Calls Obama ‘Remarkable’ Before Plotting His Treachery

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  June 21st, 2011 at 02:30 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Huntsmanletter

As Jon Huntsman headed out the door to China in August of 2009, he sent Barack Obama a handwritten note. Included is the statement “You are a remarkable leader — and it has been a great honor getting to know you.”

The rest of the story is that Huntsman went to China to serve as Barack Obama’s Ambassador to the Chicoms and, concurrent to that, decided to challenge Obama for his job.

It speaks volumes about the man’s lack of character and naked ambition that he would choose to serve the President, cast that choice as the patriotic thing to do, then pooh-pooh any notion of disloyalty to the President of the United States when he began plotting against him.

In Huntsman’s own words, he considered Obama a “remarkable leader”. What changed? And did Huntsman violate the Hatch Act? You can bet the media is going to give him a digital rectal exam trying to find out.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • Goldwater_Conservative

    with Huntsman including calling the President a remarkable leader, but I just can go with the “plotting treachery” argument. Obama was elected to a 4 year term, and no where is it assumed that he is entitled to another term. So as I see it, one could serve under him for his first term, and when its up anyone who feels they can do a better job has the right to run for President and thats not trechery agasint Obama, his term is over and its not to be assuemed he gets another one.

  • Goldwater_Conservative

    can*t go with

  • littlehouse18

    including voters, and tell them what he thinks they want to hear. Someone not to be trusted.

  • momac

    “You can bet the media is going to give him a digital rectal exam trying to find out.”

    That is, after, and _IF_ he is the nominee as they hope. Until then he will be their best friend, I am betting. Look at the respectful nature of his discourse!

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    And I respect the President of the United States.

    He and I have a difference of opinion on how to help a country we both love.

    But the question each of us wants the voters to answer is who will be the better President; not who?s the better American.

    The problem here Mr. Huntsman is that you seem to think that the only question that matters is the one you and President Obama agree upon…

    Unfortunately, the people are perfectly happy determining who the ‘Best American’ to lead this nation shall be come November 2012.

  • wennejunk

    “digital rectal exam”

    I do believe that’s the correct medical term as well.

    Who knew the internet would allow the media to cross over into performing medical procedures. Wonder if they will bill him when they finish?

    Will the wonders of Obamacare never cease?

  • momac

    he is saying that he and the president want voters to answer who would be the better president– implying that people other than he and the president want something else, a vote on who’s the better american. otherwise why set up that comparison?

    the guy is a slimeball from the get-go, he’ll be sniping at conservatives all along the way, to great media fanfare.

  • traversecityconservative

    who would work in the Obama administration. I would never vote for someone who has bad enough judgment to call Obama a “remarkable leader.” I would never vote for someone whose family has a company who has sold Iran something that could be used as fuel for their missiles. I would NEVER vote for anyone who gave such a limp, cowardly piece of crap speech as he did today. The only good thing about him running is that Romney’s numbers will go down because they are going for the same Rino base.

  • layedbackguy2

    Wow. Have you changed your mind about this post?

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/05/25/on-zealots-and-zealotry/

    I like and respect my boss, and I try to help him get the job done, but if I thought I had a chance at getting his job, I would definitely go for it. Is ambition a bad thing?

    What is up with the Huntsman hatred?

    When Obama appointed Huntsman to what is arguably one of the most important ambassador positions available, the cynics claimed he was just trying to sabotage the career of a person who had a good shot at running against him…sounds like the strategy worked!

  • Whacker77

    I’m not a Huntsman supporter in any way, shape, or form, but I feel using the word “treachery” goes too far. He’s not a Rosenberg.

  • gekster

    If Huntsman is so conservative, then why did the most liberal President in history pick him.
    Anyone care to answer?

  • Bill S

    I did a search of this page, and the only place I saw the word “traitor” used was in YOUR comment.

    You need to go back and read the very article you link. There is reference to “taking shots” at candidates. That’s not off limits – to anyone. The issue is those who post here and do nothing but slam other candidates. This is why myself and other contributors/moderators have taken to asking “who is YOUR candidate” of those who do nothing but criticize. Needless to say, Erick writes daily about those he does support.

    And all you have to do is read the commentary to know “what’s up with the Huntsman hatred” (and “hatred” would be a bit much…)

  • Bill S

    means “disloyalty”, which is precisely what he is describing.

  • blacktrain

    Why does the MSM fawn all over him?
    At this moment, 8 bits on Politico, half a dozen at CNN, another 6 at MSNBC, anyway, you get the picture.
    Why are they pimping him so hard? Why are they praying he get’s the GOP nod?
    Sounds kind of “Manchurian” to me.
    Nope. Something’s rotten. Good luck, pal!

    Now, that Perry feller in Texas…

  • layedbackguy2

    …is calling him a traitor.

    This is why I believe the link is relevant.

    I was just surprised by an attack based on this, coming from the right, and wondered if Huntsman had any actual policy positions or other past history that would justify such a strong word.

  • Bill S

    The two are not synonyms.

    Go read the diaries and you’ll get answers ro your questions. A google search will show you past articles he’s written on the topic.

  • morostheos

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/traitor

    They may not be synonyms but that’s simply because one’s a verb and one’s a noun.

    You cannot be a traitor without having engaged in treachery.
    Engaging in treachery makes one a traitor.

    If you can defend his acts as being treacherous, it shouldn’t be any more difficult to defend the statement that he is traitor. No need to run from accusation or try to draw a distinction where none exists.

    And frankly, this whole issue reminds me of the birther issue. Like Obama and the birth certificate, there are many other things to disqualify Huntsman from being the nominee (abortion, AGW, praising Obama as a ‘remarkable’ leader) that to focus on this issue is a waste of time.

    Even if Erick is right, it’s not a winning issue.

  • Bill S

    If it helps keep Huntsman from the nomination. No one has claimed this is the only flaw the guy has.

  • morostheos

    on this site find the argument unconvincing (judging by the comments section of these Huntsman related posts), the majority of which are presumably more conservative than the average voter, how much traction do you think it will have with less conservative GOP voters? I’m guessing not much. It’s a distraction from real issues.

    I happen to agree that he should have resigned before laying the groundwork. But short of evidence that Huntsman actively undermined the President during the performance of his duties, I just don’t think it’s that big a deal and not something most people will think is important. But maybe I’m wrong. It has happened before.

    “No one has claimed this is the only flaw the guy has” – nor did I accuse anyone of claiming that it was but you could certainly get the impression that it’s the only flaw Erick thinks is important.

    (And I guess I should include a disclaimer that I DO NOT want Huntsman as our nominee if that wasn’t already obvious.)

  • barleycorn

    The issue isn’t whether Obama deserves a second term, its that accepting a high profile presidential appointment and then resigning after two years to run against the President (any President) is tacky, disloyal, and unprincipled.

    It would be different if the USA was a ship headed for a rocky shoreline and Obama and Huntsman were the only two able bodied men on board. However there are plenty of well qualified candidates to fight Obama for control of the national steering wheel.

    In his hurry to be Mr. Big, Huntsman has revealed that he is disloyal, overly ambitious, and a political contortionist.

    Heaven knows we already have enough of those types in Washington.