|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
     Founders
Managing Directors
Blogger Pool
|
 Saturday, December 1, 2007
 By George F. Will ...  On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee's candidacy rests on serial non sequiturs: I am a Christian, therefore I am a conservative, therefore whatever I have done or propose to do with "compassionate," meaning enlarged, government is conservatism. And by the way, anything I denote as a "moral" issue is beyond debate other than by the uncaring forces of greed. His is a moralist's version of the intellectual vanity once ascribed to Oxford's Benjamin Jowett: My name is Jowett Of Balliol College; If I don't know it, It is not knowledge. Many Iowans think it would be wise to nominate a candidate who, when the Republicans were asked during a debate to raise their hands if they do not believe in evolution, raised his. But, then, Huckabee believes America can be energy-independent in 10 years, so he has peculiar views about more than paleontology. Huckabee combines pure moralism with incoherent populism: He wants Washington to impose a nationwide ban on smoking in public, show more solicitude for Americans of modest means and impose more protectionism, thereby raising the cost of living for Americans of modest means. Although Huckabee is considered affable, two subliminal but clear enough premises of his Iowa attack on Mitt Romney are unpleasant: The almost 6 million American Mormons who consider themselves Christians are mistaken about that. And -- 55 million non-Christian Americans should take note -- America must have a Christian president. Another pious populist who was annoyed by Darwin -- William Jennings Bryan -- argued that William Howard Taft, his opponent in the 1908 presidential election, was unfit to be president because he was a Unitarian, a persuasion sometimes defined as the belief that there is at most one God. The electorate chose to run the risk of entrusting the presidency to someone skeptical about the doctrine of the Trinity. If Huckabee succeeds in derailing Romney's campaign by raising a religious test for presidential eligibility, that will be clarifying: In one particular, America was more enlightened a century ago. Labels: mike huckabee It's somewhat ironic to me that Huckabee was able to trim his figure while governor while not able to do the same to his state budget. Indeed, there could be some funny jokes made using Huckabee, the state budget, and many of the common euphamisms for spending. I'll let your mind work out a few options.
Besides waistlines and state bottom lines, there is a world of difference between Romney and Huckabee. From the AP: Mitt Romney loves statistics. The former venture capitalist pours over charts and grafs. He analyzes situations and data from every angle. It's little wonder, then, that as he campaigns for president, the Republican sometimes shows his wonkish side. Huckabee is the opposite: Mike Huckabee is the easygoing ex-governor of Arkansas who charms his audiences with homespun stories of growing up in a family of modest means while sprinkling in broad policy stances under the themes of patriotism and core values. The former Southern Baptist minister tends not to dwell on the details of policy matters, choosing instead to tug on his audiences' heart strings. So is this just a contract in style? On the surface it might seem that Romney is wonkish, while Huckabee is a smooth-talker, both with equal substance behind the facade. However, I think that Huckabee's style hides his lack of depth. Quick, name me the last policy proposal that Huckabee has generated? The fair tax you may say? We can hardly credit Huckabee with the proposal. Besides, does he even know how it would work specifically? Yes, he says it is fairer, flatter, and family friendly, but what does that mean? Who decided it was those things? And how much good will it do for use if it won't ever be passed? OK, next policy proposal? I'll just wait here patiently...........Still waiting............still waiting. I think you get my point. But you might say that we don't need new ideas, just old ones that get done. That may be, but is Huckabee really the man to get stuff done? Is that his platform: competence? Huckabee is what I call an issue-candidate. We have several issue-candidates in the race this year. Tancredo is an issue-candidate on immigration. John McCain is an issue-candidate on the war. Mike Huckabee is an issue-candidate on life. Beyond that we get little if anything from him (or any of the others on topics other than their issue). Mitt Romney, on the otherhand, is a complete candidate. As he's been arguing for months, we need a BROAD coalition of conservatives from three major camps: economic conservatives, foreign policy conservatives, and social conservatives. Mitt Romney would effectuate policies for all three camps. Huckabee would attempt to make a solid, balanced, three-legged stool into a hopping pogo-stick. Much in the same way that Rudy Giuliani would leave the traditional conservative coalition missing key elements, Mike Huckabee would alienate key constituencies. Romney is the only candidate who embraces and would further the interest of all three groups. Additionally, Romney IS running as a candidate of competence. As his ads routinely reiterate, he's done it in business, at the Olympics, and as Governor of Massachusetts. He can point to specific policies that he enacted, a budget crisis he saved, and a vigorous fight for life and marriage that he led. For all of Huckabee's talk on life, he's never had to fight for it. He hasn't had to stare down the legislature in fighting to keep gay marriage out of his state. Romney has. Romney led. To be sure, Huckabee is a forceful and engaging personality, but is that all we get? Where's the beef? Where's the substance? I, for one, am not convinced that there is any. Labels: mike huckabee In an editorial written for the Arkansan newspaper, The Leader, Ernie Dumas writes:
"Mike Huckabee raised more taxes in 10 years in office than Bill Clinton did in his 12 years. Clinton tax increases - Increased the general sales tax from 3 percent to 4 per- cent (Act 63 of special session of 1983) - Increased sales tax by half of 1 percent and extended the tax to used vehicles (Act 3 of 1991) - Increased the corporate income tax from 6 to 6.5 percent for corporations with net incomes greater than $100,000 (Act 1052 of 1991) - Levied a 16 percent tax on snuff (yes, there are a few people who still dip snuff) (Act 628 of 1987) - Levied a 25-cent tax on each pack of cigarette papers (yes, there are people who still roll their own) (Act 1045 of 1987) - Increased the cigarette tax from 17.75 cents a pack to 21 cents a pack (Act 399 of 1983) - Increased the cigarette tax by a penny a pack (Act 1211 of 1991) - Levied a 2 percent tax on certain tourism items like admission to theme parks (Act 38 of 1989) - Increased excise taxes on mixed drinks sold for on-premises consumption (not wine or beer) (Act 844 of 1983 and Act 908 of 1989) - Increased motor fuel taxes by 1 cent a gallon (1979) - Increased motor fuel taxes by 4 cents a gallon (Act 456 of 1985) (Clinton vetoed the bill but the legislature overrode his veto.) - Increased the tax on motor fuels by 5 cents a gallon - Increased motor vehicle registration fees, 1979 (subsequently repealed) Huckabee tax increases - Imposed an income tax surcharge of 3 percent on tax liabilities of individuals and domestic and foreign corporations (Act 38, 1st special session of 2003). (It was temporary until revenues improved. The legislature repealed it in 2005.) - Increased the sales tax by 1/8 of one percent by initiated act (but it was a personal campaign by Huckabee, who campaigned across the state for it and took a celebrated bass boat trip for 4 days down the Arkansas River holding press conferences in each river city to urge passage of the act) - Increased the sales tax by one-half of 1 percent (Act 1492 of 1999) - Increased the sales tax by 7/8ths of 1 percent and expand the sales tax to many services previously exempt from the tax (Act 107, 2nd special session of 2003) - Collected a 2 percent tax on chewing tobacco, cigars, package tobacco, cigarette papers and snuff (Act 434 of 1997) - Levied an additional excise tax of 7 percent on tobacco (Act 38 of 1st special session of 2003) - Increased the tax on cigarette and tobacco permits (Act 1337 of 1997) - Increased the tax on cigarette and tobacco – cigarettes by $1.25 per thousand cigarettes and 2 percent of the manufacturers’ selling price on tobacco products (Act 434 of 1997) - Increased the tax on cigarettes by 25 cents a pack (Act 38, 1st special session of 2003) - Levied a 3 percent excise tax on all retail sales of beer (Act 1841 of 2001 and extended by Act 272 of 2003 and Act 2188 of 2005) - Revived the 4 percent mixed drink tax of 1989 and added a 4 percent tax on private clubs (Act 1274 of 2005) - Increased the tax on gasoline by 3 cents a gallon (Act 1028 of 1999) - Increased the tax on diesel by 4 cents a gallon (Act 1028 of 1999) Note: Contrary to what Huckabee has said repeatedly in debates, speeches and TV shows, the 1999 gasoline and diesel taxes were not submitted to the voters and approved by 80 per cent of them. It was never submitted to a vote. It was the governor’s bill and it became law without a vote of the people. What the voters did approve in 1999 was a bond issue for interstate highway reconstruction but it did not involve a tax increase. Existing taxes and federal receipts were pledged to retire the bonds. - Increased the driver’s license by $6 a person, from $14 to $20 (Act 1500 of 2001) So which raised taxes more? It is hard to quantify. If you measured the increases in the revenue stream, the Huckabee tax cuts far exceeded Clinton’s but that would be unfair because the economy had grown and the same penny of tax would produce far more under Huckabee. But if you look at the major taxes, I see the aggregate Huckabee taxes as greater, especially if you deduct the 4 cent gasoline and diesel taxes that Clinton vetoed in 1985 and that the legislature enacted over his veto. Anyway, the sales tax is the big revenue producer. Both raised it by 1.5 cents on the dollar and both expanded it to cover a myriad of services. Clinton raised motor fuel taxes a little more, Huckabee cigarette taxes a lot more. A further note: Huckabee claims credit for a major tax cut in 1997, saying it was the first tax cut in Arkansas history (there had been many prior to that) and that he forced the Democratic legislature to curtail its impulse to always raise taxes. The facts: The omnibus income tax cut bill of 1997 was proposed by Gov. Jim Guy Tucker in the spring of 1996. It had multiple (7) features, all aimed at relief for middle-class families or the elderly. He asked interim legislative committees to expand on his plan. Tucker then resigned before the legislature convened after his conviction on Whitewater-related charges, and Huckabee took office. At the legislative session that followed, the Democratic caucus of the House (88 of the 100 members) made the Tucker tax cuts its chief program. The bill was introduced with 83 sponsors (all Democrats) and all Democrats voted for it. It was unopposed. Huckabee’s tax cut was to give each taxpayer a check for $25 each fall, saying it would help offset the burden of sales taxes on groceries (the repeal of which he repeatedly opposed). The legislature rejected Huckabee’s plan and passed the Tucker bill. Huckabee signed it into law. The 94 tax cuts that he said he fathered are similarly misleading. The vast majority of those were the usual exemptions and modifications of various taxes and fees that the legislature enacts every time it meets. They were not a part of Huckabee’s program with a few exceptions. Rather, Democratic legislators sponsored them, usually at the behest of whatever special interest benefited, and Huckabee signed them when they hit his desk. If you did a similar summary of Clinton’s years he could claim probably well over 100 tax cuts. Every Arkansas governor since World War II could claim dozens each. If you counted all the tax benefits extended to corporations under the incentives enacted by the legislature under Clinton — and they were part of his programs, especially in 1983, 1985 and 1989 — the tax cuts would dwarf those under Huckabee. posted by THE LEADER..." (Emphasis was added by me.) The bottom line is that despite is pastoral rhetoric, which is what I think is behind the support he is receiving, Huckabee is a wolf in sheep's clothing and we need to get the word out. Huckabee can only serve to play spoiler and give Giuliani the nomination. A win for him in Iowa doesn't help Huckabee, but rather hurts Romney and helps Giuliani.
Check out the Iowa blog Round up post over at Iowans for Romney
I've re-done the right side blog-roll (AGAIN) to make the key Iowa sites more prominent. The two sub-headings that have "IOWA ACTION CENTER!!" are the most important or well-trafficked blogs. Jeff Fuller Friday, November 30, 2007
Although, I believe that Mitt will win Iowa, this a very plausible outcome if things go somewhat differently.
Here it is .... Huckabee wins Iowa, Romney a close second. Rudy a distant 3rd or fourth. Romney wins Wyoming, which nobody is contesting. This is however, good for bragging rights later. Romney then wins New Hampshire, Rudy a distant 2nd or 3rd. Huckabee finishes not far behind Rudy. Momentum from this win propels Mitt Romney to victory in Michigan, with Rudy 2nd, Huckabee 3rd. Mitt then wins Nevada and Huckabee wins South Carolina. Having gone 0 for 5 Rudy's campaign collapses. Why would Rudy's campaign fall apart after not winning any of the early contests? Think about it. For almost a year now voters have heard that Rudy is the front-runner for the nomination. Week after week of defeats will raise questions about why Rudy is not able to win. Failure to win first in the Midwest (Iowa), then in the Northeast, again in the Midwest and finally in the South and West, will take their toll. This will be extremely difficult to explain away for a candidate who's main argument is that he is electable. Romney and Huck will be hyped to the hilt for their success and commentary about Rudy will only focus on why voters are rejecting him. Ninety percent of the voters who have only paid a limited attention to the race, will be shocked at Rudy's apparent dramatic collapse. Having suffered too many torpedoes to the Steamship Rudy, it will flounder and sink rapidly. With Rudy out of the way, Florida then becomes a battle between Huck and Romney, as does the Feb 5th primary. I really like our chances with this scenario. Although, I like our chances better with an Iowa win, which will lead us to almost certain victory. Fans of Rudy Giuliani will contest the likelihood of this happening. However, the electoral history of both parties is clearly on the side of the above scenario, with no candidate ever having been able to survive such a poor start. Steven Swint from Dry Fly Politics alerted me to his post about how Romney (with HORRIBLE hair!!) went out early one morning to help a guy clean up his yard in the wake of the San Diego Fires WITHOUT inviting/alerting any press
 (original link here which originally came from a journal entry that someone shared via email with friends)   This is a man who doesn't just talk the talk . . . he walks the walk of hard work, compassion, and Christlike service. Romney for President!Jeff Fuller (Crossposted at-----> Iowans for Romney) Thursday, November 29, 2007
I've argued before that McCain is an ideologue - persisting in ideas regardless of facts. Of course even an ideologue can be right. Such an outcome is more the result of luck than anything else. The more likely result of blind adherence to ideas is failure. It is much more likely that a man like Mitt, through rigorous analysis of facts and arguments, will have the right answer.
Such is the case of the exchange between McCain and Romney over "waterboarding" last night. Most pundits praised McCain for his spirited stand on waterboarding, even as he got the facts wrong. From James Taranto at the OpinionJournal's Best of the Web:
Labels: John McCain
The first "primary" race in Virginia just took place today! And Romney won.
At 1:30 today, Mitt Romney filed 15,000 signatures to meet the requirements for Virginia presidential primary. Every campaign in the race will tell you that Virginia has the most difficult process to get on the ballot. You have to submit 10,000 signatures with at least 400 signatures from each 11 congressional districts. Each county or city entity has to have its own petition page for signatures and you need the voter address and in some cases the last four digits of the social security number for it to be valid. People who collect signatures have to be registered voters in Virginia (in other words you can't farm this out to high schoolers). The VA ballot submissions opened up yesterday and as far as we know Romney is the first candidate to file. Other candidates like Huckabee are paying 50 cents per signature. Thompson and Edwards are just getting started. It will be interesting to see on December 14th who the actual candidates will be on the ballot. As background, there are only a handful of paid staffers for Romney in Virginia but dozens (if not hundreds) of volunteers chipped in during the elections in November to help get the signatures required. Whole Saturdays were dedicated to rounding up the needed votes. Unlike other campaign Romney did this with a grassroots flare and did not outsource it. Kudos to Team Romney, Lt. Gov. Bolling, and the VA team for making this happen. This is one more example of why Romney is the best candidate to face the formidable forces of the DEMS in the general election. Labels: grassroots, primaries, primary, Virginia  Fresh off his excellent showing at the debate Wednesday night, Mitt Romney announces the endorsement of American Conservative Union President David Keene. WP Blog has the details:Keene said he became "convinced that Mitt Romney represents our best hope for 2008" and added that in the weeks remaining before the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3, 2008 he would work to persuade "my fellow conservatives that if we are serious about electing a conservative president in 2008, it's time to unite behind his candidacy." Long courted by Romney, Keene agreed to formalize his endorsement of the former governor during a face to face meeting in Florida on Tuesday, according to knowledgeable sources. Of Keene, Romney said he was "proud" to have the endorsement for his "campaign for conservative change." Labels: acu, davide keene, endoresements, Endorse, Endorsement
Labels: rudy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Show/Hide 1 Comments | Post a Comment