From a reader:

You said, “[I’m of two minds about Huckabee, but one of the two is] that Huckabee deserves all the scorn we can possibly heap upon him. His attack on President Bush in Foreign Affairs—he denounced the administration’s “arrogant bunker mentality”—amounts to something like gross political stupidity.”
But what is more important, 1) what one believes to be true, or 2)to be true to a political party. And if 2, then can a true statesmen win the presidency if he/she has disagreements with the party?

Me:

Republican candidates, I’d argue, owe Republican officeholders a degree of respect, an underlying allegiance, even when they disagree with them. (I’d apply the same argument to Democrats.) Why? Because the cohesion and durability of the two great political parties bears on the health of the nation itself. For a full treatment of this point, see the work of the late, and great, political scientist, Seymour Martin Lipsett. For a brief treatment, just remember Ronald Reagan, who invented the eleventh commandment: “Thou shalt not criticize a fellow Republican.”

Compare Huckabee’s comportment with that of John McCain. From late 2003 until the surge got underway at the beginning of this year, McCain dissented, at times vehemently, from the administration’s strategy in Iraq. And all along, it now appears, McCain was right. Yet he always demonstrated respect for the commander in chief. McCain disagreed, all right—but found a way of doing so that reflected well on him and Bush alike. That’s the way it’s done.