Redstate

Here is one report that you are correct.

"Internet musings are one thing, but when local Republicans opposed to Huckabee recently asked their Democratic friends to share the opposition research files from previous races involving Huckabee, they were told "no." In fact, one Republican was told in response to repeated requests, that they were saving the material for Hillary."

http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2007/12/12/DavidJSanders/344403.html

Republican 527s will do to Hillary.

It is in the works.

This sort of behavior from Huckabee would fit the liberal media template of "Republican hypocrisy" (i.e. Republicans behaving like Democrats), and it would get some sizable play.

The Clintons, on the other hand... the expectation is for malfeasance, and I don't think there's much that could possibly come from that camp, short of live human sacrifice, that would startle people anymore.

"No matter how much lipstick you put on the taxation pig, it's still a pig... and it's currently snout-down in your wallet." - Michael Fisk

... but ultimately;
Democratic 527s + MSM > Republican 527s

I guess we could keep an eye on the hit count and see what happens.

so that they can talk about the ad. At least this seems to be the standard process for these ads. A decent internet hit piece can pick up more in free media than they could get from huge direct ad spends.

I mean, he has a quote from Milton Friedman in his footer. C'mon.

Think about it...How could he possibly be a Huckanut if he supports free market principles and fiscal conservatism?

I was replying to the OP, not Zuiko.

Erick didn't use those exact words, so I was confused and figured you were replying to zuiko.

That said, I agree with your first comment in that Huck has zero credibility to fight back.

Ever since the whole DuMond story became common knowledge to those outside Arkansas, I've wondered why Huck couldn't just come out and apologize for it, claiming to have learned a lesson.

His fingerprints are all over the DuMond release and his denying it only hurts him.

Many would give Huckabee credit for running such a great campaign. His campaign has been terrible to date.

One of the first things you do in campaigning is to bring out negative information about yourself and put it in the best light possible. He should have brought out the DuMond case back in March or April and spun it the right way.

Since Huck has largely been unable to admit wrongdoing, he did not do this and will likely respond by attacking the character of the guy who made the video.

Yep Huckabee is toast. He has been relentlessly attacked the last week or two and yet still remains on top according to today's Rasmussen poll. Give me a break.

the next Jimmy Carter.

Yes, Huckabee is toast.

Good argument. Despite what the FACTS are suggesting.

.

Jimmy Carter appealed to many because of his faith background.

But it turned out that he had such a warped application of his faith principles that he was a disaster as President and he continues to call good evil and evil good to this day.

Huckabee has serious issues with use of pardons or urgings of parole. This one case dooms his electoral chances in the general. It better stop him cold in the primary so conservatives have a chance in the general.

But beyond this one case, his rhetoric is typical class-envy populism. How a man of faith can encourage envy and strife for political gain is beyond me. It's warped misapplication of good intentions. And such rhetoric spits in the face of a vital portion of the conservative movement.

Economic populism and errant compassion = a Republican Jimmy Carter. Appropriate description. No apologies here.

it is that Republicans can jump from one factually-dubious attack meme to another just as quickly as Democrats can.

And John Edwards is basically just Jimmy Carter regurgitated. So, you're basically spot on.

"Yep Huckabee is toast. He has been relentlessly attacked the last week or two and yet still remains on top according to today's Rasmussen poll. Give me a break."

that's the scary thing. The MSM has been propping him up lately and can continue to do so, long enough for him to mess up the race, or, in worst case scenario, actully win the nomination and then crash and burn, spreading disaster on the GOP in 2008.

Will the Huck bubble crash *before* or *after* he does enough damage to the nomination race to prevent a real conservative victor? God willing, it's before Iowa.

The truth is out there:

http://holycoast.blogspot.com/2007/12/huckabee-was-commutation-and-pardo...
http://www.arkansasleader.com/frontstories/st_07_21_04/huckabee5.html
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Questions+remain+about+...

Here’s more stuff the liberals have on him and will use at their convenience (and our inconvenience) - the pleas from the Dumond victims to please not release Dumond the rapist:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/10/new-documents-revealed-in_n_761...

Huckabee’s Willie Hortons:
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2007/12/huckabees-willie-hortons.html

...that means you're backing them? What strange logic.

Trying to lend campaign advice to someone who would be John Edwards/Jimmy Carter reincarnated a) if either was dead and b) if he weren't a Baptist who doesn't believe in reincarnation is a bit perplexing considering that this site is supposed to be dedicated to promoting CONSERVATISM as well as Republicans.

We should all be uniting to soundly defeat this socialist, not extending olive branches.

...trying to prop him up and defend him for some time now. But Huck is getting way past his shelf-life.

Erick's postings are not the actions of merely a casual observer.

I am not calling on him to post anti-Huck venom. He just needs to give up being an apologist. And suggesting that Huck should going after the messenger on this issue is way over the top - as comments by others indicate.

He's usually better than this. Needs to step back and reassess. Thus my admonition.

Maybe the Christian voters need to take a closer look at a guy who had more than his share of ethical scrapes as Governor:

http://therealmikehuckabee.blogspot.com/
Soliciting gifts from public: “Gov. Mike Huckabee and his wife, Janet, are registered for home furnishing gifts at Target and Dillard’s department stores as they prepare to leave the Governor’s Mansion in January and move into a house they recently purchased in North Little Rock. “

Even more on Huck’s hand-in-cookie-jar and using-public-money-for-private-purpose ethics issues here:
http://realmikehuckabee.blogspot.com/

http://realmikehuckabee.blogspot.com/2007/12/meet-huckster-san-diego-uni...

Over the years, Huckabee has:

-Used campaign funds to pay himself $14,000 for being his own media consultant.

-Used campaign funds to pay himself $43,000 for use of his private plane while attempting to hide what the payment was actually in return for.

-Used an account set up to cover operational costs of the governor’s mansion to pay such obviously personal expenses as fast-food and dry-cleaning bills.

-Set up a nonprofit organization that paid him $23,500 without disclosing the source of the money.

-Attempted to take $70,000 of furniture with him when moving out of the governor’s mansion.

-Took more than 130 gifts worth more than $300,000 – while suing to overturn a law that made him disclose the gifts. “

File this under: “Will be used by Hillary two weeks before the election”.

It doesn't look like there is much to it.
______________________________
"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

How far did they have to travel to film the mother? Did they stay in hotel rooms? Did they buy any programs for their computers to produce the spot?

If the cutoff is 5k, and volunteer time doesn't count as an in kind contribution, then they're probably OK, but I dunno. I hope they saved their receipts.

"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death. I'm very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that." - Bill Shankly

In point of fact, he happens to have a bunch of supporters who are neo-nazis and a bunch who are Troofers. He's never bothered to repudiate them.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

several distinct groups of supporters. Many of the groups seem like they have nothing in common. Among them are the neo-nazis. I don't really understand what his appeal is to that group, but they do seem to be on his side. Lighten up a bit. We know that not ALL of the good doctor's supporters are neo-nazis, but there is no doubt that some are.

Other groups that support him:
1. Traditional Libertarian Party members. This support is obvious since Paul came from that group.

2. Some of the antiwar crowd. Paul has called for a complete withdrawal of US forces from ALL foreign countries including Iraq.

3. The "911 Truthers". These are the people who believe our government blew up the towers ourselves.

4. The "black helicopter" crowd who believe the trilateral commission is trying to turn our soverenty over to either the UN or something that looks like the EU. Paul seems to be part of this crowd himself. There's a bit of overlap with the truthers here.

5. The "get the government out of everything" crowd. This has a lot of overlap with the Libertarians. I have the most sympathy with this group, but they're completely unrealistic.

6. The gold bugs. These people want to eliminate the Federal Reserve system and go to a gold standard.

And there's probably a few that I've forgotten.

Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
I'm with Fred!

Neo-Nazis, Klanners and White Supremicts, Skinheads. Fun groups like that =)

Though it makes no sense to me that fascists would support RP to me, Huckabee seems more idealogically aligned to their viewpoints from the Republican field. And let's not get started on the Dems ;)

Edit: delete one of the "to me"s.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

Maybe someone here at Redstate could hook up a few volts to the submit button when you don't do a proper reply-to....

==== 13 ====

==== 13 ====

Try again. Look up ARKids. Then look up the Club for Growth report on him. Then look up Huckabee's remarks on SCHIP, and tell me he's not conservative.

I think the Club for Growth's attack is misleading. As I said, let's compare the tax rates of Arkansas and Massachusetts. Let's look at what the tax hikes were used for. Let's look at the budget situation over his entire term in office.

I haven't seen a good independent analysis doing that. I see pro-Huckabee stories. I see hack jobs.

My position: I think the Club for Growth's report is the Republican establishment going after a candidate it views as a fiscal populist. He's not a known commodity such as Rudy or Fred.

As for SCHIP and ARKids, you can support providing health care to poor and middle-class families and still be conservative.

The surveys I've seen show that 80 percent of the public supports SCHIP's expansion, including senators such as Chuck Grassley. I guess that makes them all socialists as well? It's your position, I believe, that is out of the mainstream.

But if you expand SCHIP, I believe, you cut other programs.

Republicans look ridiculous when we join together to fight SCHIP yet support earmarks. It's what got us killed in the last election.

As I said, let's compare the tax rates of Arkansas and Massachusetts.

Combined State and Local Tax Burdens

Source: Tax Foundation (which uses Dept of Commerce data)
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

______________________________
"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

It's wonderful when someone passes off a chart like this to demonstrate Huckabee as a pro-tax liberal.

The table demonstrates nothing. For example, for the first six years of Huckabee's term as governor, taxes actually went down (10.1 to 10).

Then taxes increased from 2004 through 2007. That's what I want explained. Why did it happen? Was the money spent to improve the state's below-average education system? Was it because of an effort to balance the budget? Did the increases come at the state level? Or did local governments and cities increase them? Were property taxes cut to offset the tax increases?

I have no idea. That's what I was asking for. A legitimate analysis.

I'd also like the same type of information for other candidates, including Romney and Giuliani before I decide my horse. (I just can't see moving back toward Thompson.)

Simply put, I don't want hack jobs and out-of-context sound bytes or tables. I think the Republican choice this time is hard. We need to choose him for the right reason.

And it shows a comparison between MA and AR, which is what you asked for.

If you want to make the argument that tax hikes are great so long as they go for education or roads or recreational areas or free health care for kids, that's fine, but it's a different argument than AR's taxes being too low. This chart shows that AR's taxes are not too low. In fact they are in about the 80th percentile compared to other states... up from about the 40th percentile when the Huckster took office.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

It's not what I asked for. I asked for an analysis of all taxes, including property taxes.

You can read, right? This is combined state and local burden. It includes property taxes, sales taxes, income taxes, and every other kind of tax levied at the state or local levels.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

Where does the table say it includes local, state, property taxes and all other fees? You'll have to show me that. Sorry, I don't see where it says it includes "every other kind of tax levied at the state or local levels." It may. But your post said: Combined State and Local Tax Burdens.

What does that mean? Does it include sales tax? Does it include hunting fees? Does it include Internet taxes? Sorry, but it's not as clear-cut as you suggest.

I also don't see where it shows which taxes increased which years. I don't see what the reason for the increase was.

So the next time you feel the need to start flaming, just relax.

My point was simply that Huckabee's record on taxes, much like Romney's, is much more complex than a table and that I want more analysis to put tax hikes in context.

What do you think tax burden means? If it was just one kind of tax we were talking about, it would be labeled as such. I think you know that.

Does it include sales tax?

Yes

Does it include hunting fees?

No... since they aren't taxes... they are fees.

Does it include Internet taxes?

Not even sure what you are talking about here... there's been a moratorium on special internet access taxes. If you are talking about sales tax for stuff you buy on the internet, then yes... it would also be included.

Sorry, but it's not as clear-cut as you suggest.

It's pretty clear cut unless you don't want it to be.

I also don't see where it shows which taxes increased which years. I don't see what the reason for the increase was.

That's totally beyond the scope of this. This shows how the burden under Huckabee and Romney changed while they were in office. The goal is not to seek out excuses for why Huckabee loves tax hikes or to enumerate all of Huckabee's many tax hikes. If you want to know which taxes increased in which years and what the excuse for that was at the time, read the CFG report on Huckabee. There's a long list of tax hikes for a long list of different reasons detailed there.

No list of excuses is going to change the fact that they moved from 30th to 13th under his watch.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

he's the only candidate who supports the FMA & HLA. So there.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

I don't think he even gets what I was trying to point out.

I lived in one city where there were fees for everything. Why? The mayor didn't want to raise taxes for local city services. He had higher political goals that weren't going to be derailed with a raise taxes record.

As a result, the police became parking ticket storm troopers. $100 parking tickets were given and they largely kept the police force in business. You had to buy $8 garbage bags for sanitation. But no tax hike.

Also, some states have learned to play the system with taxation. They have fees on everything so they can seem to be a low-tax state. It's similar to crime and education statistics.

Again, I guess he doesn't realize how people manipulate the data.

The fact of the matter is that Huckabee's fair tax proposal should be what's considered. I've seen mixed reviews.

But Zuiko has made up his mind, or the Club for Growth made up his mind for him, and he can't consider alternative perspectives.

That's kind of sad.

It's you who's clueless. Bottom line, the Club for Growth is right on the money on Bubba Jr. He's nothing more than John Edwards with an R, at the very best.

With respect to the Fair Tax, I'd be fine with it (maybe) if it could be implemented. It can't be. It won't be. By the time the Congressional Dems get their fists in the pie it won't look anything like the original proposal. It's DOA.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Let me know when parking tickets are automatically mailed to your house, whether you drive a car or not, and add up to several thousands of dollars every year. If you want to figure out what percent of a MA residents income is spent on renewing their driver's license versus an AR resident, knock yourself out. Nobody is stopping you.

But wait... that would actually require effort on your part. You have no facts to offer. You just have stupid, unsubstantiated allegations of manipulation of data. I guess if you don't like the facts, they just CAN'T be real!

I'm really starting to think some of these Huckabots are worse than Ronulans. At least the Ronulans have much more interesting conspiracy theories.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

The Club for Growth ad showed Mike Huckabee, as Governor, endorsing one tax increase after another as acceptable.

Now, if you are a moderate to liberal Republican or a Democrat, you probably see no problem with endorsing a tax increase here and a tax increase there. And you probably don't object to more government spending on social welfare programs like public education and health care (SCHIP and Medicaid/Medicare).

But the free market, economic conservative wing of the Republican party does reject the idea that we need higher taxes and more government spending on social welfare programs.

That's why the ad was run and I think it was targeted for conservative viewers to see (I see it often on Fox News during Brit Hume's Special Report Hour).

Again, I'm not buying Huckabee yet. I just moved off Thompson.

But the Club for Growth ad was taken out of context. Huckabee was saying somehow the state needed to cut spending or to raise some taxes to balance the budget. Context is everything.

Second, in general, I support no tax increases. I'd like to see the size of the federal government cut 25 percent. Minimum.

But Republicans (both in the WH and Congress) are the ones who gave us No Child Left Behind and Medicare Part D. They are the ones who lost the last election by losing the moral high ground of fiscal sanity. When was the last time the Republicans seriously proposed a balanced budget amendment? If they fought for that, as hard as earmarks, I doubt Republicans would have any problems with their base.

Third, I don't object to a few social programs. I see no problem with targeted education funding that provides our future workforce with well-equipped classrooms, for example.

I see no problem in changing our health care system. It's a quasi-Socialist system now. In what other profession, can you set up an office and you are guaranteed a payment from the government (Medicare and Medicaid)? It doesn't matter if you do your job well. It doesn't matter if the service is needed.

Instead, I'd give the states and local government the money going to these programs and say, Here is the money, serve your people.

Finally, I'd like to explain to the "free market, economic conservative wing of the Republican party" why economic populism is gaining ground. Wasn't Bush passed off to us as a free market economic conservative? Why do we continue to sign free trade agreements that allow China to flagrantly disregard trade laws? Why do we allow the country to steal our intellectual property? Why do we allow the EU to come up with rules that are clearly unbalanced? How many WTO decisions seem incredibly biased against American-based companies?

I have no problem with free trade. But I don't see our existing agreements doing it.

Finally, it is the free market, economic conservative wing (and its political groups) that tried to jam immigration reform down our throats.

As Paul Greenberg (most respected Arkansas editorialist, at Washington Times) said today:

"To hear the bean-counters in The Club for Growth tell it in their videos, television commercials, YouTube potshots and general frontal assault, Mike Huckabee "spends money like a drunken sailor." (The Club's turns of phrase aren't very original. Its specialty is numbers, not metaphors.) This kind of criticism can be as powerful as any set of statistics wrenched from the context that produced them. The Club has a point -- but only on paper. When you compare the dramatic tax cuts enacted early in the Huckabee administration here in Arkansas with the later tax increases, you come up with some $500 million in additional taxes.

An impressive amount. But on closer examination, it turns out that some $400 million, or four-fifths of the total, went to carry out the state Supreme Court's order in the Lake View case and keep Arkansas' schools constitutional. Mike Huckabee had little choice in the matter if he was going to obey the law. Some did urge him to defy the state's highest court, but this isn't Orval Faubus' Arkansas any more.

We've learned a thing or two since 1957, thank goodness. And as governor, Mike Huckabee did more to improve education than pour money into it; he's been interested in improving outcomes, not just raising inputs.

There were other tax increases during Mike Huckabee's more than a decade as governor. But should he have left the state's highways in the miserable condition in which he found them, rather than press for a long overdue bond issue? Should he have left the state's poorest children without health insurance, ignoring the needs of the least of these? Should he have frittered away the state's tobacco settlement instead of reserving it for an ambitious public health program? Most of those higher fees and taxes were justified by either pressing necessity or a prudent investment in the state's future. He left Arkansas a healthier, wealthier state -- economically, educationally, physically.

To some of us, what the Club for Growth considers Mike Huckabee's great failures sound more like a list of his great successes. When it came to economic policy, he was less interested in griping about problems than solving them.

... If he's failed the Club for Growth's litmus test, he didn't fail his state.

www.washingtontimes.com/article/20071214/COMMENTARY/112140030/1012/comme...

This guy has been defending huckabee for years. He is his media guy. He is an old complaint about him.

http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/2007/01/smokin_huckabee_filte...
.
_____________________________________________________
American First, Conservative Second, Republican Third