Fair's Fair
By Erick Posted in 2008 — Comments (41) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
When I put up the Thompson ones, his supporters complained. When I put up the Romney ones, his supporters complained. When I put up the Rudy ones, his supporters complained. Now the Huckabee supporters can complain.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Fights Between Friends — Comments (22) »
Fair's Fair 41 Comments (0 topical, 41 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Showing the videos all of the candidates is good so everyone can make up their own mind. However, there is a lot of context that goes along with this one.
Huckabee was a Republican Governor in a VERY democratic state. Something like 80% of the legislators in Arkansas were Democrats when he was in office. Everyone knows how Democrats like to raise taxes. Mike was simply saying which ones he would support. It's not like he had a lot of choice in the matter.
Even if he did have a choice and raised taxes, would that be worse than pandering to every group you give a speech to just to get their vote, like Romney does? Can you really trust him?
Would you rather have someone who wants to take your 2nd Amendment right away? Someone who thinks abortion should be legal but thinks it is morally wrong? This is what Guiliani believes. Even his own firefighters in New York don't trust him or like him.
Bottom line, all politicians have skeletons in their closet because at one time or another, they have all had to compromise on something in order to get to where they are at. The question is, which one can you trust and which one can you live with.
Mike was simply saying which ones he would support. It's not like he had a lot of choice in the matter.
If he had just told us what tax hikes he wouldn't support. He probably wouldn't have even had to go up to the podium to recite that extremely short list.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
The President should've just passed that pork barrell water projects bill because there is a dem majority in congress and it was going to get overidden anyways. Sounds pretty rediculous, doesn't it?
Either the huckster is a tax-and-spend repub or he has no backbone. Either choice is repugnant.
Isn't he just saying we need to get the budget balanced and how that happens is up the legislature?
----------------
Kevin Holtsberry
Managing Editor
www.StopHerNow.com
....unacceptable to me. I will whole-heartedly support Fred, Mitt, Rudy, or even McCain, but not the Huckster.
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
Had an early lunch. Almost lost it on the keyboard.
Hey, maybe he can claim that was his fat brother or something, and that he would never had said such things.
“I think we are the team to beat in the NL East -- finally.” - Jimmy "MVP" Rollins, 1/23/07
"....or if you want to place a surcharge on income taxes, that would fine with me too"...
Gov. Mike Huckabee (D-Arkansas)
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
gainst itself. Look taxes are a fact of life but levying them against unpopular minorities isn't acceptable. I don't smoke, drink infrequently and try to eat healthy, if I didn't that should be my choice not the governments. I don't want to have to go to a boot legger to get my eggs and bacon in the future.
_____________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I mean, I guess I prefer raising tobacco taxes over say sales taxes in general from a selfish point of view because I don't smoke, but then he went on to talk about how he'd be OK with higher income taxes and higher sales taxes.
He used the phrase "profound thanks."
Profound thanks. Yikes.
“I think we are the team to beat in the NL East -- finally.” - Jimmy "MVP" Rollins, 1/23/07
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
A LOT!!! Tobacco has gone up almost two dollars in the last few years (at least a good can of Copenhagen). Exactly the reason I don't like Huckabee. I don't want him (his government) interfering in my life.
Tommy Oliver
www.race42008.com
Huckabee's support for taxes, big government, and amnesty for illegal aliens leaves me pretty cold on him as the standard bearer for Republicans in 2008. fwiw.
Mike "I never met a tax I didn't like" Huckabee...
-- digitalhap
I guess we will have to watch our wallets if Huckabee becomes president.
There doesn't seem to be a tax that he doesn't want to increase on people.
Who's looking out for the taxpayer these days?
The Left thinks that the "axis of evil" is Wal-Mart, Haliburton and Enron.
If you're looking for a pro-life low tax conservative, you need to look at Duncan Hunter. I know he doesn't get as much press as the other candidates, but if you just spend a few minutes at his website I think you'll be surprised at how much you agree with him. www.gohunter08.com
You have Romney YouTubes saying that he will never go back to Reagan-Bush and that he will vow to uphold Roe.
You have Giuliani performing crazy acts with Trump.
You have Fred sounding like a pro-abortionist in his mis-characterizations of pro-lifers.
And here you have Huckabee who is trying to balance the budget with the most economically liberal legislature. That's boyscout stuff compared to the above three.
Not credible. You tried the "On tobacco, who cares" ploy, which was clearly intended to mislead anyone who did not take the time to watch the video. That kind of advocacy, once seen, makes anything else you say suspect.
Here you're trying to paint raising taxes as some act of responsible sainthood, just part of being helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. Bull. Do you remember what happened to Bush-41's lips? So do we. If we'd known in advance, he might have lost the nomination. Here we do know in advance. Not gonna vote for any more lips. Wouldn't be prudent.
BTW, I'd rather have my politicians cavorting in tutus than taking money out of my wallet by force of law. Also, calling Fred pro-abortion persuades no one but angers many. Yeah, I know, you're going to try it again, saying you're right. Trust me, you are not helping your cause doing this. Your fellow Huck supporters need to send Juan Carlos to pay you a visit.
Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.
Not credible. You tried the "On tobacco, who cares" ploy, which was clearly intended to mislead anyone who did not take the time to watch the video. That kind of advocacy, once seen, makes anything else you say suspect.
You are correct on this one. It was more than just tobacco. I did not listen closely enough and I also just came from the RealClearPolitics blog which said that the video was about tobacco.
Here you're trying to paint raising taxes as some act of responsible sainthood, just part of being helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. Bull. Do you remember what happened to Bush-41's lips? So do we. If we'd known in advance, he might have lost the nomination. Here we do know in advance. Not gonna vote for any more lips. Wouldn't be prudent.
Governors have to run a state and balance budgets. Huck was a governor for 10.5 years, the longest out of anybody running, in a very economically liberal state. Does this video provide any context to the situation that Huckabee was facing? No.
http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/fairs_fair#comment-563931
By the way, what executive experience does Fred Thompson have?
Also, calling Fred pro-abortion persuades no one but angers many. Yeah, I know, you're going to try it again, saying you're right. Trust me, you are not helping your cause doing this.
Fred does have a solid voting record in the Senate, and I believe that his record is a product of his belief in federalism. But didn't Fred mischaracterize pro-lifers on MTP? Plus, he does not support the Federal Marriage Amendment or the Federal Marriage Amendment, which is crucial to many social conservatives.
..."mischaracterizing." Please explain how Fred "mischaracterize[d] pro-lifers" AND "sound[ed] like a pro-abortionist...on MTP" And what the goal was of your repetition in the last sentence -- "he does not support the Federal Marriage Amendment or the Federal Marriage Amendment."
Yeah, that's the same thing twice. Proofreading is your friend, yo.
Saying Fred sounds like a pro-abortionist is a crock. And Fred isn't even my guy.
The only crazy thing Rudy did with Trump was to go on stage in drag. It was a J-O-K-E. (And Rudy was too old for the Donald, who likes them fresh off the vine.)
Romney has stated he changed his mind on abortion. You may not believe him, but you have to take it into account.
And the Congress will push me to raise taxes and I'll say yes. And they'll push, and I'll say yes, and they'll push again, and I'll say, to them, ‘Read my lips: any new taxes!’
___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.
And completely expected. Now let's have a realistic discussion over
* the differences between State and Federal Gov't Responsibilities
* the residual need for State Gov'ts to both fulfill all Federally Required Entitlements and to Balance the Budget
* the balance of cutting spending versus the need to increase taxes.
* the need to make compromises in order to fulfill the goal's of the state.
First, There's a major difference between State and Federal Gov'ts. Whereas the Federal Gov'ts budget reaches more than a trillion dollars with a GDP to support it even higher, State and Local Gov'ts rely on a more tepid GDP and limited sources of income that fluctuate with varying markets. The federal Gov't has its hand in just about any source of income/spending in the economy, whereas the state is focused on a more limited economic basis. Opposing the diversification of income is essentially opposing the ability of a state or local government to ensure stability in both bad as well as good economic times.
Second, State Government's have significant obligations to fulfill their share of federally mandated entitlement programs including Medicare, Medicaid, Education, the list goes on. In economic downturns the federal government has its hands on two major functions that fuel economic growth. It can cut taxes, which helps reinvigorate economic growth (best results are typically at least a year away, as we've seen with the Bush Tax cuts-important later) and it can increase spending (which also took place under Bush).
The major difference between the Federal Budget and the Arkansas budget is the requirement per the Arkansas' Constitution to balance the budget. During this time frame there was significant spending cuts in the Arkansas budget as non-entitlement spending did not even exceed inflation, whereas entitlement spending was required to increase. This is due to increased applicants and need for those entitlement programs, increasing both federal and state expenditures. How then to cover the budget? Cut the State's share of those programs, lose federal gov't dollars, toss your bond rating into the dirt and fail to meet obligations to your state constitution? The federal government may be afforded the ability to increase spending, cut taxes and wait ten years for the deficit to be eliminated; State government's like Arkansas don't have the same privelege.
Finally, in State Government's there exists a notion that has been lost in the last 15 years in the federal government: Compromise. You can have principles, you can have convictions, but ultimately at the end of the day the citizens of your state expect a budget to be passed without impasses. In this speech Huckabee is doing just that. Clearly, Huckabee emphasizes the "target" multiple times in this speech as a limiting factor he will not go above. $90 million dollars when the legislature wanted to appropriate hundreds of millions of dollars in additional taxes and fees. Pennies on the dollar to the interest that my generation will have to pay the interest accrued on a yearly basis in regards to the federal Government.
Ultimately, Huckabee's record of cutting spending in Arkansas and implementing the largest tax DECREASE in Arkansas's history speaks for itself. RedStaters would do themselves a service by looking at the WHOLE record, rather than just information accrued by one source.
preceded by "these would be nice, if we could afford them."
I'm not a Huckabee supporter, but I do feel required to point out that Reagan increased taxes by a huge margin his first term as Governor of California under somewhat similar circumstances (i.e. Dems controlled the State Legislature).
I'm not saying it shouldn't be relevant to the consideration of his candidacy, I'm just saying that it shouldn't be an automatic disqualifying factor either.
John Bolton for President
"FEAR THE 'STACH!!!"
We hold that the fed govt is doing things that ought be done at the state level, and then some want to criticize state guvs for doing things!
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
I believe next to nothing should be done by the federal government. It should almost all be left to the states.
I believe almost nothing should be done at the state level, it should be left to counties and other local governments.
I believe close to nothing should be done by counties and cities.
What does that leave? Me. I want to be the one responsible for my life. I want to decide what and when I give a helping hand. I want to decide how I save my money, whether I smoke or drink, how much I weigh. I want to decide whether I own a gun and what I can say.
I've said it before and I will say it again, and proudly - The government should be the last resort. If it can be done by any means other than government, then that is how it should be done.
Just because your one and only candidate has serious issues doesn't give you the right to misrepresent everything that everyone says. What about my post had anything to do with abortion? I'm tired of you Anteater. I tried a few times to debate with you on the merits, but you can only attack, and poor attacks taking things wildly out of context.
Therefore, I award you the *Strawman Award*
Hereby presented to you for your unfailing ability to build strawmen and tear them down with ruthless efficiency.
Except I was expanding on Federalism in hyperbolic language. Furthermore, if you have been paying attention you would know that I am as opposed to abortion as any you will find. I cannot support the HLA, because the ends do not justify the means, even if there were a chance of its passage, which we know there isn't.
If you want to discuss things with me, take this gem into consideration - I always put my money where my mouth is.
I support the GWOT, and that is why I carried an M16 9,000 miles away from my home and family. I oppose abortion, which is why I have voted pro-life, I have worked at Crisis Pregnancy centers, counseled young people making the decision, and I have protested at clinics. I believe charities and churches are the answer to poverty, not government, which is why I give money and time through local charities.
You can disagree with me on method and means, but don't suggest I don't mean what I say.
That is my threat to you. Impugn me again, and I will simply ignore you. Period. Maybe not much of a threat, but it is good enough for me.
Your question implied that he was pro-choice, not that "Federalism does have its limits."
But if you want to play this game, I guess your guy is pro-murder since he hasn't proposed a constitutional amendment to remove jurisdiction from states on all homicides. I mean, we can't trust the states to deal with something as important as life, right? There are countless examples of states allowing murders to go free. Obviously someone who wouldn't support an amendment stripping states of jurisdiction on these cases is a closet proponent of murder.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
I know that I'd heard that he had lost a lot of weight, but it's hard to understand just how much weight until you see that clip.
It's an especially amazing feat given that his apparent appetite for government lard hasn't waned at all.
James Boulder makes this interesting comment:
This video is taken out of context and the entire speech is about the fact that the courts in Arkansas mandated 90-100 million more in education spending. That is after they had cut in other places to try and avoid the courts mandate. This is NOT a you tube moment because he has always said that he did have the tax raised because of court order. What a crock. I can’t believe thsi is the kind of thing that some of you think is YOU TUBE MOMENT.
http://race42008.com/2007/11/12/the-peril-of-being-a-first-tier-candidat...
Looks like Huckabee really is a pro-life liberal.
My taxes will probably double under him, but at least I will get told on a regular basis that abortion is wrong.
"Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich. "
William F. Buckley, Jr.