Political Insider

By Copyleft

January 22, 2008 6:13 PM | Link to this

Huckabee has hit on his simpleminded slogans to win over the simpleminded voters.

It remains to be seen if they’re still a majority in this country.

By believehuckabee

January 22, 2008 7:02 PM | Link to this

We love Mike Huckabee. He has more executive experience than anyone else running in this election. He was re-elected Governor of Arkansas until his term limits expired. He was their Lt. Gov. prior to that. He was named one of the Best Five Governors in America by Time Magazine. He is AUTHENTIC!

Mike Huckabee will be receiving our votes!

By Churchill

January 22, 2008 7:13 PM | Link to this

Time magazine= a bunch of libs. Mike Huckaphony is lib pretending to be a conservative. He is only conservative on social issue. Not good enough for me. Huckaphony is a prolife Breck girl, or as he calls himself, John Edwards.

By Debbie

January 22, 2008 7:28 PM | Link to this

Huckabee: The Biggest Big-Government Conservative by Michael D. Tanner

http://www.cato.org/pubdisplay.php?pubid=8838 This article appeared on Foxnews.com on December 11, 2007.

Huckabee: The Biggest Big-Government Conservative by Michael D. Tanner

This article appeared on Foxnews.com on December 11, 2007.

PRINT PAGE E-MAIL PAGE TEXT SIZE If you liked George W. Bush’s brand of big-spending, big-government conservatism, you’ll love Mike Huckabee.

Most of the leading Republicans running for president show some support for Bush’s ideology, but no other candidate so completely embodies it.

As governor of Arkansas, Huckabee dramatically increased state spending. During his two-term tenure, spending increased by more than 65 percent — at three times the rate of inflation.

The number of government workers increased by 20 percent, and the state’s debt services increased by nearly $1 billion. Huckabee financed his spending binge with higher taxes. Under his leadership, the average Arkansan’s tax burden increased 47 percent, according to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, including increases in the state’s gas, sales, income, and cigarette taxes. He raised taxes on everything from groceries to nursing home beds.

Huckabee answers these complaints by pointing out that he “cut taxes 94 times” while governor. True. But most of those tax cuts were tiny, like exempting residential lawn care from the sales tax. Some cuts reduced overall state revenues by as little as $15,000. On net, Huckabee increased state taxes by more than $500 million. In fact, Huckabee increased taxes in the state by more than Bill Clinton did.

He truly appears to believe that if something is a good idea it should be a federal government program. On its annual governor’s report card, Cato gave Huckabee an “F” for fiscal policy during his final term, and an overall two-term grade of “D.” Only four governors had worse scores, and 15 Democratic governors got higher grades, including well-known liberals like Ted Kulongoski of Oregon, Rod Blagojevich of Illinois, and Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania.

But Huckabee doesn’t just embrace big government in the form of big taxes. He truly appears to believe that if something is a good idea it should be a federal government program.

For example, having become health conscious while losing more than 120 pounds (a remarkable feat), he now calls for a national smoking ban. Because he believes that “art and music are as important as math and science” in public schools, he wants these programs funded — and thus, directed and administered — federally.

Huckabee is, incidentally, the only Republican candidate for president who opposes school choice.

Huckabee has called for increased federal spending on a variety of programs from infrastructure to health care. He wants more energy subsidies, including, naturally, more subsidies for ethanol. In fact, he supports increased agricultural subsidies generally. He is the only Republican candidate who opposes President Bush’s veto of the Democrats’ proposed expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, and he is skeptical of most conservative proposals for entitlement reform.

Calling himself “a different kind of Republican,” Huckabee often appears to be channeling John Edwards or Lou Dobbs. He rails against high corporate profits and attacks free trade agreements. As governor, he raised the minimum wage and increased business regulation. He says it is “a biblical duty” to pass more regulation to fight global warming.

Michael D. Tanner is director of health and welfare studies at the Cato Institute, and author of Leviathan on the Right.

More by Michael D. TannerPerhaps Huckabee’s only claim on conservative credentials is that as a former Baptist minister, he is more anti-abortion and anti-gay than the other candidates. In many ways, he has been running an overtly religion-based campaign. But even here, his preference is to increase and centralize federal government power. Unlike Fred Thompson, John McCain, or Ron Paul, Huckabee rejects federalist solutions to these issues and would have the federal government overrule state abortion and marriage laws.

Under the Bush administration, the Republican Party has increasingly drifted away from its limited government roots. It has come to be dominated by a new breed of conservatives who believe in increasing the size, cost and power of government to achieve “conservative ends,” even if that means limiting personal freedom in the process. Bush has brought us No Child Left Behind, the Medicare prescription drug benefit, and a 23-percent increase in domestic discretionary spending, and Huckabee’s been right there with him.

On election night in 2006, 55 percent of voters leaving the polls said they believed the Republican Party had become the party of big government. Mike Huckabee is doing his best to convert the other 45.

By Jarof Pickles

January 22, 2008 7:42 PM | Link to this

Anyone who is against the ‘Fair Tax Plan’ must be in the top 1% of wage earners. Wake up middle class and the poor, it benefits you the most!

By Debbie

January 22, 2008 7:49 PM | Link to this

Great article, read the entire article. I just posted snip its

I’ve decided Mike Huckabee is an economic retard

http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/foradietguruhuckabeeservesupseriousemptycaloriestothepublic

For A Diet Guru, Huckabee Serves Up Serious Empty Calories to the Public Is this man retarded? By Erick Posted in 2008 — Comments (31) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

You can see his total principles here, but if you want the real highlights, look no further than this synopsis of his economic stimulus plan. It’s a keynesian recipe for big government. Liberals will love it — complete with anti-war canards.

By Bitter EX democrackkk

January 22, 2008 7:51 PM | Link to this

Exactly! FAIRTAX helps everyone, and taxes those who arent paying their fair share…

Its a shame that Boortz cannot get Ron Paul to endorse it, but Ill take NO taxes all the better!

STRIVE to be SMARTER than a democrackkk!

By Churchill

January 22, 2008 8:01 PM | Link to this

I will not redefine conservatism to fit what Huckaphony wants it to be. Huckaphony is a prolife lib. Mike Huckaphony is not the only candidate open to the Fair Tax, by the way.

By Will Jones

January 22, 2008 8:15 PM | Link to this

The Fair Tax is a scam to serve the propertied rich that will put the middle and working poor on the gov’t books. It’s not even close: a consumption tax only helps those with consumer surplus and oppresses those whose status - victims of fascist plutocracy - prevents savings. The clowns pushing it lied about everything else and are tarred with the Nazis now in power. Any who push the Fair Tax are morons or Nazis.

By Craig

January 22, 2008 8:53 PM | Link to this

Yeah copyleft, there are plenty of simple minded voters - in Georgia anyway - look at the dingbats who support boortz’s “soak the middle class tax.”

By DrColes

January 22, 2008 10:19 PM | Link to this

Illegal Aliens and Immigration is NOT the same thing. Immigrant is a legal status granted by a sovereign country. We have to many folks who do not know and are ignorant or outright deceivers, confusing illegal alien workers calling them illegal immigrants with immigrants. Criminals did NOT build America; Citizens and LEGAL immigrants built it. 80% of the American people want an end to anarchy! This is NOT a Democrat, Republican, Independent issue. It’s an American Issue.

Illegal aliens are criminals, those who hire them are criminals and those who aid-and-abet them are criminals.

Illegal aliens in America have NO rights. We are required by law to arrest and prosecute, deport them. (Title 8 U.S. Code) To report illegal aliens call the DHS National Hotline 1 866 DHS 2ICE. (1-866-347-2523)

No, matter your political party affiliation, and setting aside your thoughts on issues. We all need to remember what it is to be an American Citizen. We need to make sure our elected representatives obey their Oath of Office and keep their Oath of Allegiance. See http://tinyurl.com/2znnvl Know whom you are voting for.

By Will Jones

January 22, 2008 11:01 PM | Link to this

Dr Coles, You make some excellent points. Please refer to the “National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry,” by the U.S. Conference of Roman Catholic Bishops, to recognize what scheme is unfolding under the design, guidance, and political influence of the Roman Catholic Church. In the documents 36 pages of English or Spanish the concept, justification, planning and implementation for promoting illegal immigration to usurp the American Republic is explicitly outlined.

Until we close the border and expel the leadership hierarchy committing this organized invasion, and their Fifth Column, led by Bush/Cheney and the Rockefeller BIG OIL bi-partisan false-elite which murdered JFK and MLK, sent us to Vietnam, now Iraq after having committed 9-11, we are whistling in the wind.

If what are now “illegal immigrants” wish to become true and faithful American Citizens we should not object, as long as the Serpent’s Head is cut-off: the Roman Anti-Christ and its treasonous Fifth Column.

By not-more

January 23, 2008 3:38 AM | Link to this

“criminals did not build America”. That’s correct. US residents did, including illegal immigrants. The current wave of illegal immigrants isn’t the first. Immigrants and illegal immigrants are more similar than they are different. They come with the same aspirations and motivations, and both work just as hard. They’re legally different, but legality isn’t the sole, nor the most profound way by which to compare two groups. At one point African Americans were “illegal”. The right-wing extremists then argued similar things. It’s because the same radicals are bigots at heart. Recognizing these facts would be a good step towards creating a fair solution. It seems these right-wing radicals cannot address the topic of illegal immigration without attacking the migrants directly, including their children and what-not.

And btw, illegal immigrants aren’t “criminals”. You can quit your hype, already. They may be law violators, but not “criminals”, neither in the legal or semantic sense.

By Will Jones

January 23, 2008 6:38 AM | Link to this

We do need a fair solution.

The “National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry,” spells out, in Spanish and English: the illegals are a “blessing” to “the Church” through which America, stolen from Rome and the ancestors of the Hispanics, is to be the site for the construction of the Kingdom of God.” Sounds like Huckabee, does it not?

The border must be sealed for sovereignty’s sake, the arrivals are welcome, but only if the Romish church hierarchy which conceived and implemented the plan to usurp the Republic is fully expropriated and banished.

All true Americans must read their Plan. Should their organized invasion be tolerated, for any reason? This is not bigotry. Part of my ancestry was Roman Catholic (the Irish have since wised up), but we are now Americans, and Our Nation is being attacked by the institution America’s Founder recognized as “the real Anti-Christ.”

Rome gave the world Hitler. Prescott Bush, his backer Vatican-banker Rockefeller and the predecessors of the Al Smith Dinner “elite” George W. Bush called his “base” financed Nazism and the Holocaust…from our shores.

The same faction killed John Kennedy and Dr. King to ensure we die for the Pope in Vietnam.

Since the Roman Catholic Reagan White House the gates have been opened at the border in obedience to the 1987 “National Pastoral Plan for Hispanic Ministry,” with amnesty and naturalization of Roman Catholic illegals breaking all records.

This must not be allowed anymore.

It is not a “natural migration.” The regimes of Latin America, have historically been the bastions of latifundistas since the Bolivarean Revolution (Bolivar followed Jefferson and sent his son to study at The University) was subverted by Rome. They are subverting our own Whig Revolution now and enunciate their stratagem FOR ALL TO SEE.

The People, and our servants in Washington, must put our house in order. The first step on the path of fairness is the Election of Barack Obama. The border must be sealed, the Fifth Column treason must be addressed, and, specifically, the traitors Rome cheated into the White House must be tried, convicted, and executed, that moral authority be returned to our governance and reputation.

Annuit Coeptis E Pluribus Unum Novus Ordo Seclorem

Under the People’s sovereignty, “The King of American reigns in heaven above.” Th. Paine

…and not in Rome. Read their working strategy for taking over the U.S.. If you do not object to their enunciated goal, and the highly effective, established practices to achieve that goal that every eye can see, please demonstrate the integrity to admit you are not with the American People. Many are part of the treasonous faction supporting fascist plutocracy and its “base” the Roman Catholic “elite” and church hierarchy. Their design is openly published. Let the terms of our conflict be debated. Shall we simply be overrun without discussion, let alone fight? I think not.

By OneForTheRoad

January 23, 2008 7:51 AM | Link to this

Anyone that consumes this stumping from Huckabee deserves to be thoroughly taxed. Everyone else should be exempt.

By light of truth

January 23, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

Dick Morris debunks the myths, lies and deceptions about Huckabee’s fiscal record, posted by previous commenters who are probably nothing but shills for Mitt and Rudy.

By light of truth

January 23, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

Dick Morris debunks the myths, lies and deceptions about Huckabee’s fiscal record, posted by previous commenters who are probably nothing but shills for Mitt and Rudy.

By Debbie

January 23, 2008 10:04 AM | Link to this

Fact Check is not a shill for anyone. They have criticized Romney and others for distortions.

Face the fact. Huckabee is history. His lies and distortions caught up with him That is why he lost SC.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/huckabeesfiscalrecord.html

Huckabee’s Fiscal Record November 21, 2007 Under fire from conservatives, the former Arkansas governor misrepresents his tax hikes, and cuts. Summary Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has been hit with criticism over his record on taxes as governor of Arkansas. The faultfinders have been members of his own party, who take issue with tax increases he enacted. In recent interviews on Fox News, Huckabee responded to some of these questions, but we found him to be misleading and incorrect on several points:

By debbie

January 23, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

http://www.arkansasleader.com/2007/12/editorialspure-fiction-from-rollins.html

Appearing before a national audience for the first time on CBS News over the weekend, Rollins had this to say about Huckabee as a fiscal conservative:

“You know, one of the things he had to do was fix the educational system. The state Supreme Court ordered him to raise $300 million to add an additional $300 million to education. The voters in the state had voted for a highway program that was totally unfunded. He went forth and made it an issue.

And then the voters themselves voted for a three-cent increase in taxes. He cut income taxes. At the end of the day the story that’s not told is this is a guy who inherited a $250 million deficit. And, at the end of the day, he left $850 million in the treasury.”

It was pure fiction. None of it ever happened, although there was a tiny grain of truth in a couple of phrases. Let’s take them in order:

“The state Supreme Court ordered him to raise $300 million… .”

The Supreme Court never ordered the governor or the state to raise a dime of taxes. It said the quality of education across the state was uneven and by and large inadequate. It left it to the legislature how to equalize and strengthen the schools.

The legislators and Gov. Huckabee decided to do it by raising taxes rather than redirecting existing resources. Huckabee also wanted to achieve equality by consolidating most of the state’s school districts, which the Supreme Court did not order and the legislature ultimately did not accept.

“The voters in the state had voted for a highway program that was totally unfunded.” What Rollins was talking about we have no idea. The voters approved an interstate highway program in 1999 but it was 100 percent funded. It was a bond issue supported by Huckabee. The bond issue was paid off from existing state taxes and federal receipts.

“He went forth and made it an issue. And then the voters themselves voted for a three-cent increase in taxes.” Didn’t happen. The voters never voted for a tax increase of any size to pay for highways. That three-cent gasoline tax, which Huckabee proposed, was passed into law by the legislature and was collected before people voted on the highway bond issue. Again: Although Huckabee has said so repeatedly, voters never had a chance to vote on taxes.

“He cut income taxes.” Okay, a grain of truth here. Gov. Jim Guy Tucker proposed an omnibus income tax cut — actually, seven separate tax cuts rolled into one bill — but he resigned from office in 1996 before the legislature assembled.

Democratic legislators — 83 of them and not one Republican— picked up Tucker’s proposal and sponsored it in the session that assembled soon after Huckabee became governor.

His own tax plan (a $25-a-person rebate) having foundered, Huckabee capitulated and signed the Democratic tax cut. The lawmakers were amazed when, during his re-election campaign the next year, Huckabee took credit for forcing the tax cut through the legislature. That has been his account of it ever since.

“At the end of the day the story that’s not told is this is a guy who inherited a $250 million deficit. And, at the end of the day, he left $850 million in the treasury.” Not true. Huckabee did not inherit a $250 million deficit but a SURPLUS of close to that sum.

Conservative budgeting by the legislature and Gov. Tucker in 1995 produced a surplus that was $107.4 million the day that Huckabee took over from Tucker in July 1996.

The Tucker budget produced another surplus of $118 million in the new fiscal year that was beginning and which Huckabee had absolutely nothing to do with. So Huckabee and the new legislature had a surplus of about $225 million to spend when it assembled in January 1997. It was that surplus that gave them the leeway to cut income taxes.

As for the $850 million surplus that Huckabee left, there is some substance to it. The surplus, built by tight budgeting under the direction of House Speaker Bill Stovall, was actually about $470 million when Huckabee left office in January but a batch of tax increases that he had helped pass between 2001 and 2005 sent the surplus soaring to $850 million by the end of this June, six months after he left office.

All those tax increases help account for the increase in size of the state government from $7.1 billion a year when Huckabee took office to about $17.1 billion when he left 10 ½ years later.

No court ordered him to do it and Arkansas voters had almost nothing to do with it. That is a Reagan-sized accomplishment all right — remember that Reagan tripled the national debt in eight years — but fiscal conservatism is a description that only Ed Rollins could apply.

By Daryl Lee Ostrander

January 23, 2008 10:11 AM | Link to this

Mike Huckabee is the only one who can win. Mark these words down so they can stare back at you when that time comes.

By Reagan conservative

January 23, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

Huckabee can not even win all the evangelical christian vote much less win the GOP primary.

By Terrence

January 23, 2008 5:26 PM | Link to this

Duncan Hunter is now endorsing Mike Huckabee!

This should help a lot of people distinguish between McCain and Huckabee. Poor Huck, he defended McCain as a hero when Romney was trying to smear McCain with one of his multi-million dollar attack ad campaigns, and a bunch of people thought that meant that Huck was the same as McCain.

Huckabee is no McCain. He never had sanctuary cities in Arkansas, he oposes drivers licenses for illegals, he wants to drive illegals home through attrition, and he has committed to seal the border and never support amnesty. No wonder Hunter endorses him. He’s also staunchly pro-life and pro-military.

Republican voters should seriously reconsider Mike Huckabee before the Florida Primary and Super Tuesday. His momentum has never stopped, even after South Carolina.

By Kim

January 24, 2008 7:10 AM | Link to this

I would encourage everyone to go to Mike Huckabee’s website.The truth about his success as gov. are twisted terribly by bias media. Washington does not want Mike in office simply because he likes tax reform and he is not a Washington insider. I have a degree in economics and have read many books on fair tax plan.and you know what…it COULD work…but big government and elite want to keep Americans down! People are getting sick of the crap. Anyway, you decide.. www.mikehuckabee.com www.fairtax.org

By Debbie

January 24, 2008 7:42 AM | Link to this

http://www.newsweek.com/id/78241

A Son’s Past Deeds Come Back To Bite Huckabee But John Bailey, then the director of Arkansas’s state police, tells NEWSWEEK that Governor Huckabee’s chief of staff and personal lawyer both leaned on him to write a letter officially denying the local prosecutor’s request. Bailey, a career officer who had been appointed chief by Huckabee’s Democratic predecessor, said he viewed the lawyer’s intervention as improper and terminated the conversation. Seven months later, he was called into Huckabee’s office and fired. “I’ve lost confidence in your ability to do your job,” Bailey says Huckabee told him. One reason Huckabee cited was “I couldn’t get you to help me with my son when I had that problem,” according to Bailey. “Without question, [Huckabee] was making a conscious attempt to keep the state police from investigating his son,” says I. C. Smith, the former FBI chief in Little Rock, who worked closely with Bailey and called him a “courageous” and “very solid” professional.

http://thewhitedsepulchre.blogspot.com/2008/01/david-huckabee-hung-dog.html

By Debbie

January 24, 2008 7:46 AM | Link to this

Are you Huckabee supporters that blinded? You get nothing but spin and lies at the Hucksters web site.

It is not just the Mainstream media attacking Huckabee. It is not just the Republican establishment.

It is Rush, Coulter, Phyllis Shafley with Eagle Forum, Thomas Sowell, Peggy Noonan, George Will, etc.

Get your heads out of the sand and research it yourself at factcheck.org.

The truth is finally exposing Huckabee as a RINO.

By Debbie

January 24, 2008 7:49 AM | Link to this

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080124/NATION/8463148/1001

Huckabee alienates GOP in Arkansas By Stephen Dinan January 24, 2008

BATTLE-READY: As Arkansas governor, Mike Huckabee succeeded at advancing his causes and was willing to fight anyone who didn’t agree, state Republicans said. (Associated Press)

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — Jake Files was a newly elected representative when all two dozen Arkansas House Republicans met for their first caucus in 1999. They had doubled their numbers in elections two months earlier, and were ready to join Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee in pushing for conservative government.

That was when Brenda Turner, the governor’s chief of staff, entered. The former Southern Baptist pastor-turned-politician took control of the governor’s mansion in 1996 with expectations that he would lead the kind of Republican ascension in other states of the Deep South. But he left office last year by turning over the governorship to a Democrat and with Republicans bitterly divided over his legacy for his party.

“He destroyed it,” said Randy Minton, a former state representative whom Mr. Huckabee worked to help get elected but who later clashed repeatedly with the governor. “We had one U.S. senator, we had two congressmen, at the tops we had 37 out of 135 legislators in the House and Senate. Now I think there’s 32 in the legislature, we have no U.S. senators and we have one congressman.”

In both on-the-record and private conversations with Republicans in Arkansas, the picture that emerges is a governor who succeeded at advancing his causes and was willing to fight anyone who didn’t agree.

“Just walked in, shut the door and said, ‘There’s two kinds of people in the world: those who are for Mike Huckabee and those who are against Mike Huckabee. I’ll do everything I can to help the first group. I’ll do everything I can to hurt the second,’ ” said Mr. Files, who left the legislature after two terms.

And that’s the way it was.

“Not only would he not help you, he would go out of his way to do things in opposition to you,” Mr. Files said.

For the 10 years he was governor of Arkansas, Mr. Huckabee was at war with much of his party.

Now that Mr. Huckabee is seeking the presidential nomination, many Arkansas Republicans warn that he could wage a bruising battle with the national party, too.

“One can hardly argue that the Republican Party has thrived,” said former Rep. Jim Hendren, who was House minority leader and ran for state party chairman in a bitter 2001 race won by a Huckabee surrogate. “We thrived as we were an opposition party and standing on principles as the Republican Party. But unfortunately, when we got some power, particularly at the state level, we began to fight among ourselves.”

By Craig

January 24, 2008 8:22 AM | Link to this

Actually Debbie, if Rush, Coulter, and Schlafly are opposed to him, I may have to vote for him. He’s got to be doing something right.

By Bernie

January 24, 2008 9:46 AM | Link to this

Craig, once again, leading the way—not by supporting people whose ideas align with his—but by perhaps supporting people who are opposed by people he opposes.

Grow a pair sometime Craig.

By TVV

January 24, 2008 2:21 PM | Link to this

http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=10019&SectionID=17&SubSectionID=116&S=1

Huckabee presents the best choice for Reagan supporters http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=10019&SectionID=17&SubSectionID=116&S=1

By John Linder

I was first elected to the Georgia House of Representatives 34 years ago. I have watched this party change for a long time. Some changes have been better than others. Two years after that first election, I went to work on the Reagan campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. I was one of the leaders of that campaign in Georgia, and my friend, Paul Coverdell, led the establishment’s efforts to nominate President Ford.

It was the typical establishment-versus-interloper campaign. Most of the friends I had made in the party were in the establishment. Most of them thought the nomination of Ronald Reagan was not only impractical, but would destroy our party.

Reagan had just served two terms as the governor of California. His record was not all that conservative. He signed the biggest tax increase in the history of the state. He got the best he could get with a Democrat-dominated general assembly. He signed a bill legalizing abortion. But governors have different challenges than presidents. Frankly, most of the establishment couldn’t have cared less about abortion. They thought the discussion of it was, well, tacky. But we were, at the time, the party that Barry built, and the new foot soldiers cared about abortion.

Their concern with Reagan was that he just wasn’t up to it. What did he know about foreign policy? How could he stand up to the Soviets? Did he understand detente? During that campaign, as in all campaigns, the establishment sat at the head table, and the rest of us milled around the small round tables below.

Coverdell approached me, after Ford had won the first several primaries, and urged me to switch sides. Paul was convinced that Ford had the best chance of winning. Paul recited all of the reservations mentioned above and then said, “John, Reagan cannot win. No one will take him seriously.” That was also the consensus of the Republican writers and commentators.

I said, “Paul, I think politics is all about what you believe. I know what Reagan believes. I have no idea what Ford believes. But you need to watch Reagan connect with the people. He is the best communicator I have ever seen. He is bringing new people into the party. And these are folks you won’t be meeting at the club for lunch. They carry a lunch bucket to work. Or a brown paper bag.”

Four years later, I worked again for Reagan and Paul worked for George H. W. Bush. Again, the Wall Street crowd sat at the head table, and the Main Street crowd sat at the small round tables on the floor.

The same arguments came from the establishment. His tax cut idea was a “riverboat gamble.” In fact, his tax cuts doubled the size of the economy and doubled revenues to the treasury. Unfortunately, they spent that and more.

Reagan didn’t understand that the world is a dangerous place and dealing with the Soviets required a more “understanding” policy. It also required a willingness to sign more treaties. They didn’t know that Reagan had no interest in understanding the Soviets. He wanted communism consigned to “the ash heap of history.” It was a neverending series of put-downs until New Hampshire. Then it was over.

Reagan won that election with the support of Larry Lunch-bucket and Betty Brownbag. They were called the Reagan Democrats. When we celebrated that victory, I asked some of them why they chose to join us. They said, “When he talked, we felt that he was talking to us.” The Reagan Democrats believe they have been ignored since 1988.

The establishment doesn’t like change. They have always felt that their seats at the head table were threatened by those new to the club. The establishment that so ardently opposed Reagan’s nomination in 1980 crawled all over each other to chair his 1984 race.

Today they now see themselves as those who put Reagan in power. His presidency was their presidency. They believe they are the keepers of the flame. Today’s establishment includes elected officials, consultants, lobbyists and even conservative writers and commentators. Unless you allow them to write the rules and approve of your positions you are unwelcome. Anyone who does not genuflect before their altar is “not conservative.”

When you look at the many fine candidates seeking the Republican nomination for president, who do you believe can best speak to those Reagan Democrats? I believe that candidate is Mike Huckabee.

When Reagan became president, one of his first moves was to reduce income taxes from 70 percent to 50 percent and ultimately down to 28 percent. As pointed out above, both the size of the economy and the federal revenues doubled in eight years.

Huckabee doesn’t want to lower income taxes. He wants to abolish them - along with the IRS, the most intrusive, coercive and corrosive federal agency ever. Mike would replace those taxes on income with a sales tax - the FairTax. Every American will become a voluntary taxpayer paying taxes when you choose, as much as you choose, by how you choose to spend. How conservative can one get?

Rep. John Linder, R-Duluth, has served in the House of Representatives since 1992.

By Copyleft

January 24, 2008 3:40 PM | Link to this

Craig points out a handy yardstick for measuring the issues: If Coulter and Rush, who are 100% wrong on every issue, are against something, it’s probably worth a closer look.

By believehuckabee

January 24, 2008 5:42 PM | Link to this

Mike Huckabee has the most executive experience of any candidate running. He was re-elected Governor of Arkansas until his term limits expired. He was their Lt. Governor prior to that. He was voted one of the Best Five Governors in America by Time Magazine. He is the best communicator since Ronald Reagan. Mike Huckabee is for real and he is authentic!

Congressman Duncan Hunter has now endorsed Mike Huckabee! http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/23/politics/horserace/entry3745619.shtml

US Rep John Linder who worked on the Ronald Reagan campaign gives a great comparison between the Ronald Reagan and Mike Huckabee campaign trails. http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=10019&SectionID=17&SubSectionID=116&S=1

By Churchill

January 24, 2008 6:03 PM | Link to this

Huckaphony is a lib endorsed by the lib. mag, Time. Huckaphony sounds like a prolife Breck Girl.

By Copyleft

January 24, 2008 6:18 PM | Link to this

Finally, Churchill has something good to say about Huckabee! I’m unsure why you’d pay him a compliment like “liberal,” though… Huckabee seems as backward and dishonest as any hardcore Repugnican.

By TVV

January 24, 2008 6:22 PM | Link to this

I can’t help but to wonder how many people are against Huck almost SOLELY because Rush, the National Review, Ann Coulter or some other pundit started a set of verbal attacks that everyone else repeats. I could build a whole speech just based on the somewhat mindless cliches about Huckabee. “He’s a Liberal!” “He’s from Arkansas and must be like Bill Clinton” “The Democrats wish they were running against him” (as if the current state of the GOP scares Democrats no matter who the nominee is). Many people hear these things twenty times a day and it just becomes true to them, whether or not they’ve ever done any independent research. Just like on the other side of the spectrum, people falsely assume that Hillary Clinton is experienced just because CNN says so.

For a supposed big spender, Huckabee has gotten more results with fewer resources than any other candidate of either party. He has the most experience running a government than any other candidate (in contrast, Mitt Romney has only four years in elected office, which is 2/3 of the elected experience that Bush had when he came to Washington). He is the only candidate proposing that the Federal Individual Income Tax rate and the Federal Corporate Income Tax is lowered to 0%, and replaced by a pay-as-you-go consumption tax. But this is supposed to be LIBERAL because a couple of pundits based in New York City say so??? Let’s think.

I especially feel like my intellect is being assaulted when they actually suggest that a pro-late term abortion, anti-traditional marriage candidate is conservative and Mike Huckabee is not.

If the conservative voters in this country are so apt to follow the “leaders” that we listen to what they say rather than common sense, we have more problems than I thought. I’m not drinking the Kool Aid - I think it’s been tampered with.

By Copyright

January 24, 2008 6:26 PM | Link to this

Wow. Are all libs as clever as Copyleft?

By Craig

January 24, 2008 7:15 PM | Link to this

ahh Bernie, always johnny on the spot with your oh so pithy and original comments…