Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Matt Towery :: Townhall.com Columnist
To Rebuild a Paranoid Party
by Matt Towery
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


We've all read or heard plenty to persuade us that the Republican Party is basically on life support, not only at the federal level, but also in more and more states.

In my recent book, "Paranoid Nation," I wrote extensively about the GOP in the chapter "Paranoid Party." Based on those writings and on the research I did for them, I believe there may in fact be a blueprint for a future Republican comeback. But to understand it, we first need to rid ourselves for good of some of the misconceptions that linger among many of those who lament the decline and fall of the GOP.

*** Special Offer ***

As I noted in the book, revisionist history has left many a misty-eyed Republican or former GOP voter with the notion that Ronald Reagan was swept into office in 1980 because of his charisma, a satchel full of conservative ideas and a disastrous Carter administration.

For the record, the "Republican Establishment" in most of the nation in 1980 opposed Reagan in the early primaries and caucuses.

Why? First, he had challenged a sitting GOP president, Gerald Ford, just four years earlier. And Reagan had been labeled a loose-cannon ultra-conservative by the media.

Even at the convention that nominated him that summer, the GOP elite was plying every trick and stratagem to force one of their own onto the ticket. They succeeded by pushing the idea that Ford was willing to consider a run as Reagan's vice president; that is, if the duties of the presidency would in truth be divided between the two men. Within hours of this tactic, this party elite got its original wish: George H.W. Bush, one of their clique, became the VP nominee.

As for Carter being a weak candidate, that was true. But most folks conveniently forget that Reagan was trailing Carter in the polls going into the last four weeks of the race. It wasn't until the two debated on national television that America felt comfortable enough to elect Reagan -- who, of course, later was ranked by the public as one of the greatest presidents in history.

I unearth these little nuggets from the past to point out that "beloved" candidates who are charming and attractive don't always win. Or at least they need an extra nudge to propel them to victory.

In offering a potential blueprint for a GOP resurrection, I'll draw on a theme outlined in the book.

Every candidate or party needs one issue around which the faithful can rally. For Reagan, it was tax reform.

To expect candidates to be in lockstep on every big issue suggests a lack of political independence on their part. And it's the so-called "independent" swing voter the GOP must somehow persuade anew.

To me the key issue is simple enough, although it will need a new spin. Because of our crazy system of withholding income from paychecks, many Americans don't know how much they pay in federal taxes. Some even respond in surveys that they didn't pay taxes at all, but instead "got money back from the government" in the form of refunds.

Since it is impossible to educate an entire nation on the impact of the income tax itself, why not focus on the thing everyone openly hates -- having to decipher tax forms, or having to pay someone else to?

The Fair Tax can be effectively explained and defended. More, it could win immediate and widespread support with most Americans if it were instead packaged as the "Elimination of the U.S. Tax Return Act of 2012."

Conservatives love the Fair Tax idea already. But moderates and independent voters aren't as sure how it would benefit them. So reformers should promise two things: First, taxpayers will never have to fill out tax returns again. Second, their taxes won't increase, and will likely decline.

Americans love comfort and convenience. Sell tax reform, and they will latch on to it.

As for the lawyers, accountants and IRS employees who might lose out, well, what's one more bailout if it means that we end this archaic and Byzantine system of taxation?

Republicans, wake up! Rally around one simple but essential idea, and then let your candidates be free to take whatever sides they wish on other issues. To gather the strength needed to prosecute a full roster of political reform, conservatives must first take control of some one essential principle. The end of tax returns would be a huge first step.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Matt Towery is a former National Republican legislator of the year and author of Powerchicks: How Women Will Dominate America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Matt Towery's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
So What About the Paranoia?
Title good, article good, but they don't match. I thought from the title I was going to be reading about how Republicans have lapsed more and more into the resentment, victimhood, and conspiracy theory of paranoia. I do not remember this from the days of, say, Nixon or Ford. It's new and getting worse.

Example: Christian activists kneel to pray in busy intersection. Rush hour. Refuse to move. Get arrested for impeding flow of traffic. Have media handy to photograph and report "Christians Arrested For Praying!". Right up O'Reilly's alley. The right-wing media are always in overdrive building up resentment and rage, and now they've started hinting that armed insurrection would be just the solution.

Meanwhile townhallers informed us before the election that Obama was a Muslim militant who was going to call in an air strike on DC right after the inauguration. Now he is deliberately impoverishing the country so he can turn us Communist. And of course he isn't a citizen, and his Black Militant Goon Squad of Thugs is going to invade white homes to take away their guns.

From his title, I thought maybe Towery was going to address this.


Towery doesn't know his history

I guess he's too young to actually remember why Reagan won.

It wasn't just the one issue of tax reform. As a matter of fact, if there WAS only "one big issue" which propelled Reagan to victory over Carter it was the Americans held hostage in Iran after the takeover of the American Embassy in Tehran.

Evening newscasts always started with the slogan: "America Held Hostage, Day (however many days since the takeover)".

And tax reform itself was only one of MANY economic issues Reagan beat Carter over the head with: oil prices, inflation, sky-high interest rates, unemployment, the Cold War, on and on and on.

You'd think Towery would have at least taken the time to talk to someone old enough to remember the era... but then, I guess it probably wouldn't have suited his thesis.

Bummer for him that there are still a lot of us older folks still around.

Of course they are...


Re: The Republican Party Officials...


They ARE in a paranoid funk!

Therefore, they will, of course do the wrong thing.

With apologies to Patrick F. McManus,
they are deeply involved in a "Stationary, Blind Panic".

Again, therefore, they will, of course do the wrong thing.



BrianR...



BrianR
Location: CA
Reply # 2
Date: Jun 11, 2009 - 12:35 AM EST Towery doesn't know his history

I guess he's too young to actually remember why Reagan won.

It wasn't just the one issue of tax reform. As a matter of fact, if there WAS only "one big issue" which propelled Reagan to victory over Carter it was the Americans held hostage in Iran after the takeover of the American Embassy in Tehran.

Evening newscasts always started with the slogan: "America Held Hostage, Day (however many days since the takeover)".

And tax reform itself was only one of MANY economic issues Reagan beat Carter over the head with: oil prices, inflation, sky-high interest rates, unemployment, the Cold War, on and on and on.

You'd think Towery would have at least taken the time to talk to someone old enough to remember the era... but then, I guess it probably wouldn't have suited his thesis.

Bummer for him that there are still a lot of us older folks still around.

~~~
BrianR,

I too, remember the Carter daze, as well as from FDR, onward.

Carter was the only one I recall asking his pre-teen Daughter for policy advice,
on film or tape, by the way.


[ paraphrased ]
I remember her answer to what is the most dangerous thing in our world...

Amy's answer was, "Nukeeyer power, daddy."

Not sure here, but we either did not build another plant after that, or perhaps one or two that were already under construction.



Here's an idea
Screw the silly tax form idea. It has ZERO emotional appeal. How about embracing traditional marriage in the light of heavy threats to tear it apart, and support a constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage.

I see no reason why I should vote for the GOP ever again unless they don't pay more than lip service to social conservative issues.

The only issue
Liberty!

Same old RINO same old
This is the same thing that the RINO establishment has been doing for 14 years now, and its why I'm not longer a Republican, merely a conserative: nothing but tax cuts. They are Democrat-lite, rubber-stamping everything the Democrats want, after maybe reducing 10%.

Democratic voters would never tolerate a party which was liberal on only one issue -- why should we support a Republiican party which is only conservative about tax cuts?

Obama a Republican?
According to Towery, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would be welcome in the Republican Party if they supported a single tax reform, while keeping their same liberal & socialist opinions about everything else.

I've got a better idea
Rather than having the GOP unite around a single issue, why not do something useful and constructive for a change? Like, get the fu** out of the way and let true conservatives step in?

The announcement of the final term for Mendez, Bunning, and the other Republican Senators was the best news I've heard all month! Now, we just need the rest of them to get the fu** out of Dodge!

U need to lighten up on CINO Matt.
Towery is 100% right for the Elephants to make dumping the income tax forms, accountants, attorneys & IRS agents in favor of Neal Boortz's Fair Tax 'the' MAJOR banner to march under.

Yes, I'm pro-life w/the usual exceptions, anti-gay marriages, I'm for a strong navy & air force, I want all illegal aliens kicked off social security, welfare and booted out of the country, I'm for states rights and gun rights, I'm for kicking foreign born Muslims out of the USA, I'm for showing the 10 Commandments in courthouses, schools and government buildings, I'm for Christian prayer in schools, I believe the founders intended us to be a Christian nation, I'm for abolishing the department of education under whatever name, I'm for decriminalizing marijuana & prostitution, I'm opposed to taxing Americans to dole out in foreign aid, etc., ..... HOWEVER.... these are issues many on the right may not agree with.

That's why dumping the Second Plank of the Communist Manisfesto... the income tax... should be the right's BIG issue... because most of us are opposed to the income tax.

Lilly IL
Were you born retarded, did your parents drop you on your head or was it public education that did this to you ?

Tax gimmicks
Elimination of the income tax is about as likely as colonizing Pluto.

These tax gimmicks never go anywhere, and the candidates who propose them are seen as loonies. Those candidates always lose.

These tax gimmicks are only proposed to avoid being conservative.

social conservatism is the base
Towery writes:

"Rally around one simple but essential idea, and then let your candidates be free to take whatever sides they wish on other issues."

Thanks but no thanks Matt. Although of course i am an economic conservative also, that stems from my social, cultural conservatism, and not the other way around. So if you are saying 'let a conservative candidate be free to be pro abortion, pro same-sex marriage,' then you are a faux conservative, a liberal in sheep's clothing.

Maybe I read a different article
.
(I mean, let's put aside for the moment the whiny Lilly delusions...we can all have a good laugh at this clown ANYTIME)

But, what I gathered from this article was the suggestion of a campaign focusing on ONE TOPIC/THEME.

...NOT that all others be excluded (or surrendered to the Leftists...) at its cost.

NOT UNREASONABLE.

Lilly
"Meanwhile townhallers informed us before the election that Obama was a Muslim militant who was going to call in an air strike on DC right after the inauguration."

Cite? I didn't think so. Now apologize, and go away.

Incomplete column, but still good advice
As BrianR pointed out, Towery left out some important details concerning Reagan's 1980 win.

However, the things he said about it were true. Especially relevant for today is the fact that the GOP has never been the party of limited government. They've traditionally been the pro-business big-government progressive party, in contrast to the pro-labor big-government progressive party.

Conservatives need to approach the GOP the way Reagan did - with a take-control-from-the-blue-bloods attitude. Not a we're-all-on-the-same-side one...


On the FairTax, Towery is right - although I disagree that we should promote it to the exclusion of all other issues. I wish someone other than Huckabee had been the one pushing the FairTax this past election. If Fred Thompson, for example, had been the FairTax guy, he might have gotten enough traction just from that one issue to get somewhere.


Siegfried says Eliminating the income
tax is about as likely as colonizing Pluto.

I hear it's quite nice there in the summer...


But seriously - the FairTax would be a great step in the right direction for limited government, even if it doesn't reduce revenues right away.

It would force people to understand how much our government really costs, and it would prevent the Feds from attempting to control behavior through the tax code. This, in turn, would lead to less corruption.

I believe this better understanding of the cost of government would lead more people to vote for smaller government over the long term.


One thing's for sure - if people who think the FairTax is a good idea assume it could never happen, and act accordingly, it's sure not to happen. Let's push for this and see what happens!

wrong issue
The Fair Tax will never pass. It is also totally un-conservative, in that it is a panacea solution offered as a complete change of what currently exists. As such, it totally ignores the law of unintended consequences. In other words, we conservatives have no historical/traditional/experienced-based evidence that it will work as advertised.

The One Issue for the Repubs should be Energy Policy. Here you have the stark contrast: driving the vehicle of your choice with $3.00 gas or being herded into Yugos with $6.00 gas (or into public transportation, which is worse). Either we produce more energy (a very simple proposition), or we buy into the Algorian Global-Warming scenario and accept that we will live poorer lives, permanently.

The Dims' energy policy is the death of the American Dream. You can't have a better issue to rally around than that.

Matt
Sorry bud, but it's the same ole, same ole GOP message, which is;

"Cut taxes spend even more."

The Republican Party Hates Good Ideas
The Republican Party is like a guy in a hotel room with a dozen of the most beautiful women in the world...all of whom are panting for sex...and he can't get it up for a single one of 'em. That is to say the Republican party is galactically impotent. The Fair Tax is a good idea; which is precisely why the Republican party will shun it.

During my lifetime the Republican party has dominance in the legislature twice; and during one of those times has had control of nearly every branch of government. Even then, the party never sought to institute its governing principles of smaller government. BTW, is the federal government three, or five time bigger than when W took office?

All of you who are gunning for this party to make a comeback starry eyed dreamers who are deluded into thinking; "Really fellas, this time it will be different". You are only kidding yourself. It is time to put the nails into the coffin of this stupid party and let this modern Titanic sink.

I have formally abandoned this worthless, worthless party for the Libertarian party. I will never vote for a pathetic sack of worthless human skin like John McCain ever again. It however, is not only John McCain. Look who the party put up against Clinton for his second term...Bob Dole. In contradistinction to that gooey sack of yeast infected vaginal fluid named John McCain; I have all of the respect in the world for Bob Dole as a man. I am sure he would make a fine neighbor and I would be proud to have my children sit on his knee and hear a story or something. As a politician however, he is another softy willing to compromise and who lacked any kind of a vision.

Let the Republican party die, and let a party arise that is actually committed to the principles of liberty upon which this nation was founded..because that is surely not the Republican party.

not before abolising the IRS
The fair tax may be a good idea, but before it is instituted the IRS must be abolished, else we will end up with both. Also, there needs to be a concrete limit on the ceiling rate on the fair tax, as with any tax that mey be instituted, such as a national sales tax.

That said, while tax may be a big issue, what the Republican party should emphasize is the reduction in the size of government. While that was done in 1994, it was not followed through on, and under Bush II we got bigger, not smaller government, opening the door for Obama, who is increasing it even more.

What we need are honest Republicans who will do what they say. At least the Democrats can depend on their cdandidates to do what they say, increase dependenceo on the government and redistribute the wealth.

There is more than one big issue, but it all boils down to eliminating all government that is not authourized under the Constitution.

Fair Tax idea
How does that tax code figure in this mess? It doesn't. Tax revenue is no longer linked to spending. Tax revenue has never been linked to bureaucratic over reach. Tax revenue is somewhat linked to liberty. There are plenty of cases where it isn't linked to liberty.
The checks and balances are broke. Neither Congress nor the tax code are the proper vehicles to fix that. They are the engines that broke them, for cryin' out loud.
I am convinced that we are going to have to weather the peril of a Constitutional Convention. If we don't a worse peril awaits.
This tax idea is not without merit. It just isn't the main course.

Sigh
Ho Hum - Auhunter is yet another American living in a fairy tale land where chocolate bunnies give hugs all day long, and where the smell of warm fuzzy love always permeates the aiir.

The Republican party cares about your ideas like I want to spend a night alone and sedated with a hungry Jeffrey Dahmer. Leave the Republican party and help us kill a dying beast.

tgwWhale, I think you're confusing
"conservative" with "traditionalist".

AuHunter - ABSOLUTELY! Passing the FairTax is contingent on repealing the 16th Amendment.

I disagree on having a ceiling rate though. I'm more concerned with putting the general rules in concrete:

1. ALL CITIZENS get the prebate. No means tests, or any other kind of test ever.

2. ALL items sold at retail are taxed. NO EXCEPTIONS for food or other necessities.


If they start monkeying around with those two rules, it could get as bad as what we have now. If they leave them alone, the rate ceiling will take care of itself.


Again - the FairTax indirectly helps reduce the size of government, because it will force everyone to think about its cost every time they buy something. Right now, the sad fact is that most Americans are satisfied with UNlimited government. That has to change.

AuHunter
"At least the Democrats can depend on their candidates to do what they say, increase dependence on the government and redistribute the wealth."

In fact, this is the GOP's mission, they just want wealth redistributed in the opposite direction and they never come out and just say it.

Remember, when Hank Paulson, George Bush and Ben Bernanke said last October, "the government needs $700 billion 'quick and clean' to recapitalize the financial system or else the of Western civilization is nigh?"

This is code for 'the Republican party wants to redistribute wealth from Main Street to Wall Street.'









'Paranoid?' How 'Bout Devious?
I haven't read MT's book, so I'm unclear exactly who or what "paranoid" refers to. I agree w/ Ratone & Matt that if there's a villain in this saga, it's the entrenched GOP apparachikocracy, & esp the cabal of statists who have the party in thrall & more in common w/ their pals the leftist totalitarian Dems than the base in "their own" party. Matt quite rightly points out that Reagan had to overcome opposition to the point of treachery within his own party, & that GHW "Voodoo Economics" Bush was really one of 'them.' You will note that Bush the elder got elected in '88 in large part due to his "Read My Lips" pledge. The tax renaissance of Reagan unravelled when Bush Sr. caved before the congressional Dems, who spent huge sums (for that time. Ah, those were the days...), then whined about the "deficit" they themselves created, & then pushed for tax hikes on Republicans to "pay for it." (yeah, right, they just turned around & spent that, too!) I don't think "paranoid" is the right word for those Repubs. Treacherous, Machiavellian, statist, devious, condescending, or unprincipled, would be more like it.

I disagree that we need to just focus on a single issue, altho there are always certain "flash points" at any given time that a campaign can utilize. Conservatism is a consistent set of principles that can be applied to virtually any issue. That's why IMO the alleged rift between 'social' & 'fiscal' conservatives is exaggerated; both positions arise from a basic belief in the worth & autonomy of the individual. What a real conservative would do in a given situation is usually fairly predictable. What perplexes us is the fecklessness of wobbly conservatives who 'go along to get along' on battles they don't want to fight today like citizen disarmament, Socialist Insecurity, or out-of-left-field zaniness like McCain-Feingold.

Credit Where Credit is Due
Mike Coffman however, is a totally solid Republican that actually believes in, and practices the principles of the Republican party. It is too bad however, that there are only about three guys like him in the party.

I wouldn't give two shakes worth of urine for the rest of the lot.

It is dangerously naive...
...to think anything good could emerge from a constitutional convention held in the current political atmosphere. Who would chose the delegates to this proposed convention? Perhaps the same people who voted for the socialist Obama? Or, would it be the ones that voted for the socialist McCain? Those groups make up the majority of Americans. No, my friends, no convention while the socialist agenda is the agenda du jour.

Insighting:
You nailed THAT arrow into the gold my friend!!! I have been leery of the idea of a Con-Con for many years now. What I really fear is the ignorant dumb masses.

They THINK you can have a "limited convention". Bravo Sierra!! Once you open the access panel to the CONUS all bets are off. The first thing to go would be the 2nd Amendment. The next would be a total rewrite of the FIRST Amendment except for the free press clause.

The tax vampires in Foggy Bottom will rewrite the free practice clause so they can LOOT all the churches in America like Cromwell did in England.

And you can forget about Talk Radio and the Blogosphere!! That will vanish too.

-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!

Brilliant
"The Fair Tax can be effectively explained and defended. More, it could win immediate and widespread support with most Americans if it were instead packaged as the "Elimination of the U.S. Tax Return Act of 2012.""
***********************

Worked great for Steve Forbes. Maybe he was just ahead of his time? Besides, the GOP has shown itself utterly incapable of avoiding divisive social issues, most of which they take a side unsupported by the majority of the electorate. So, good luck with the "single minded" marketing approach as the salvation to the future of the GOP.


Constitutional Convention
those of you who fear the lack of limits on a constitutional convention are exactly right.

Remember - the way we got our current constitution was that they called a con-con to make some minor changes to the articles of confederation. The articles ended up getting completely tossed.

The result ended up being good in that case, but we dare not risk it in this age of the looters.

No Moral Values
Both Parties have destroyed America with their self rightous GREED. They are controled by Big Business and they forgot about We The People who they were voted into office to serve and protect us.If We The People don't stand up to them and the Liberal Idiots of this country there will be nothing left. The ACLU is slowly tearing down what our country was built on. We need to put a stop to them and the far right Liberal Idiots that are destroying our Pride, Honor , and Values that made us great a one time. Have We The People forgotten those that gave the Ultimate Sacrifice for our Country and those that survived that gave us our FREEDOMS today. It is time to WAKE UP and STAND UP and FIGHT for our Country and take it back 1 way or the other again. Those in Washington today are committing TREASON and it is time to do something about it. WAKE THE HELL UP AMERICAN'S and FIGHT for what is our GOD Given Rights for our COUNTRY.

In my book
In my book, in the book, the book I wrote, in my book, mentioned in my book....

Shut up - if i wanted to read your book, i would have read it.

FAIR TAX
Works for me..would effectively remove a lot of power from our elected politicians who haven't seen a level of corruption low enough for them to dislike.
Then we can move it to the next level, dump any income taxes in the states..our guv is going berserk with tax increases with his rubber stamp Democrat majority.


Auhunter
you reminded me I didn't include that in my previous post..definitely demolish the IRS and the tax industry as a whole.
I think FAIR TAX may get a reasonable hearing once the magicmessiah's taxes start becoming a reality to the American people.

Lily, for goodness sakes, for someone your age
you should have more wisdom than you show. All I ever read in your posts are talking points..
someone who came up several years earlier than I did should have had the benefit of a better
public school education than the kids today.
But you spout all the revisionism that's been foisted on our indoctrinated kids since the 70's.
I was TAUGHT American History and CIVICS when I was in public school and TAUGHT to appreciate
what our Founders gave us..WHat happened to you?
All you do is worship at the feet of the Pharoah, rather than think critically. He's not now, nor ever will be 'god'..and if he continues to shake his fist in GOD's face he's in for a huge surprise.

Wrat Wringer and Insighting Truth
You're both right. A Con-Con would be dangerous. I said so. The only other real, honest to God way we are ever going to turn the corner is a violent one.
Take your pick.
If you think otherwise then tell us where your faith lies for this miracle to happen? It ain't going to.

Top 5 Issues To Run On
Campaign issues & positions that courageous conservative hopefuls for PotUS, Senate, House, state gov or legislature, could run on:

1. Group victimology, quotas, v. equal opportunity & protection.
This is low-hanging fruit, as Barry O's very election belies racial victimology. As a bonus, racial quotas in mortgage lending helped create the current recession, & Barry was a soldier in the war on lending standards.

2. The Economy Stupid
"Stimulus" spending & gvmt fiscal responsibility, financial industry stds., jobs & manufacturing.
The Dems will be deeply vulnerable on this by 2010 & 2012, because their schemes won't work & they'll try the Great Depression gambit, i.e. "it would have been so much worse..." Yes, GWB screwed up. Point out how printing money causes inflation, government meddling, NOT "deregulation" caused the financial meltdown, Keynes is dead, gvmt spending doesn't make prosperity, if central planning was so great why doesn't the USSR rule the world now?

3. "Climate change" dogma v. sanity, basing all acts on real demonstrated science, cost-bennie, & a pro-lo-cost-energy policy

Kick McLame to the curb on this. The debate isn't over; it never happened. Even Al Gore didn't dare run on it in 2000, but you can cite the economic destruction, the weakness of the UN-dictated "science," the free pass for China. Offer to be open regulate CO2 to the extent it can be PROVEN to be harmful!

4. Free speech & press
Again, disown McBozo. Disclaim McCain-Feingold. Stand up for the 1st Amendment as written, fully applicable to political speech, whether broadcast or not, whether a dollar changes hands or not.

5. Real Health Care Reform via returning it to private sector v. government monopoly rationed healthcare.
Point to the waiting lists & rationing in other countries w/ socialized medicine.

I Wonder...
If you supported Mike Huckabee during the primaries, Mr. Towery. Because your article here basically describes what he was fighting for back then and continues to this day, on his Fox News show and various speeches he gives around the country. He was and remains the most vocal and visible supporter of the Fair Tax, amongst many other ideas and ideals.

Mike Huckabee is the GOP's future and this country's best chance to try and fix the epic mess Bush Jr. and Obama has caused. Let's just hope the rest of the establishment and even this website's users and creators open their eyes to the truth before it's too late and we end up with another 4 years of liberal Socialism under Obama.

When Huckabee first ran for POTUS,
he looked really good to me. He supported home-schooling and the FairTax, which are both big issues for me.

But...

He's a statist. He wants to use the power of gov't to force people to act right.

Look at his own web-site. He wants the gov't "to act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

He's fine with the existing massive fed involvement in education, and wants to increase it with arts and music programs.

He's right about what needs to be done on energy, but wrong about who should do it. The gov't should get out of the way, not pick winners and losers in any industry.

He talks about reducing the size of gov't by streamlining departments. No! We need to be eliminating them!

Look at Huck's comments on libertarianism. He's perfectly happy with redistribution of wealth in many cases. I'm not.

I agree with him on some issues. He's not bad on health care & guns, and good on life, marriage, taxes & the bailout. But we need a believer in limited government to turn things around, not a statist.

You're insane
Chris. For saying that Huckabee is a "statist." You obviously have listened to too much "establishment" types like Rush and crazy libertarians like Glenn Beck.

Because if you actually read Huckabee's books and listen to what he has consistently talks about, along with looking at his record as Governor of Arkansas for 10+ years, you'd realize there's no way he's a "statist." That old label is what the anti-Huckabee crowd who's afraid of his popularity, wants people to think, when in fact, he is the opposite of the "big government" Republican haters constantly try to portray him as being.

Please research facts before spouting illogical misinformation about Huckabee here. Then again, this site is well-known for having anti-Huckabee users and founders. Oh well....

Obama would be happy with sales tax
What matters is how much taxes we pay, not the way we pay them. Obama and Hillary would be happy to get rid of the income tax if the sales tax rates were high enough to make more money.

So a fair tax / sales tax is not a conservative idea. It's a meaningless gimmick.

If the goal is to cut taxes and spending, then we could just do it like President Reagan did. No need for a Fair Tax gimmick.

Right Siegfried
The fact that his pastor was a psycho and that he has said the he wants to "spread the wealth around" doesn't contradict your ridiculous claim?

How can you morons continue to spew this lunacy? Do you think you'll get a piece of the pie after Obama is done? No you'll get the shaft like everyone else. Grow some gonads and step out of your bubble.

The Democrats HATE the FairTax, even
though it completely un-taxes poverty level spending. The only logical explanation is that it would reduce the power of politicians - and THAT is as conservative as it gets.

Keep in mind that Reagan reformed the tax code and greatly simplified it ... but here we are 20 years later and it's much worse that it was before Reagan started. We need a permanent solution.



ClickClick, I brought up specific points of contention about Huckabee from his own website and his own words. If you want to change minds about Huck, try addressing the specifics instead of just saying I'm insane & denying what I wrote.

Just this issue would be helpful: our constitution enumerates various powers to the federal government, and says any other powers are reserved to the states and the people. Please explain to me how any federal involvement in education (which Huck and most Republicans support) is constitutional.

In all fairness, I'd say every last Dem at the federal level, and most Republicans are statists, so I'm not singling Huckabee out here.

Why Not ABOLISH Income Tax Atogether?
I was reading a follow-up book to the orginal Fair Tax book by Neal Boortz and Congressman John Linder of GA. This book was basically an answer to a lot of the criticisms of the Fair Tax. I carefully read through every criticism Neal and Linder chose to include in their book, but there was one criticism that these Libertarians would not address: If the Federal government could increase the income tax, the first-ever "Flat Tax" of its day from originally a mere 1% in 1913 to exorbitant rates today, why would you trust these criminals with the Fair Tax, which they could increase on a whim as well??? Why not get rid of the 16th Amendment to the US COnstitution altogether??? This is precisely the Constitution Party's main criticism of the Fair Tax. We support the abolishment of the 16th Amendment, the legitimate passing of which is still questioned to this day. Yes, neither Neal nor Linder had the balls to take on this question. Maybe, it's because guys like Linder, the criminals in DC really think we trust them or something with our money. Get real.

Hats Off & Standing Ovation to Towery
for explaining what has been self-evident to us TRUE Conservatives for quite some time now about Reagan and the GOP. The GOP was NEVER behind this man because they have always been CINO's. Conservatism doesn't sit well with their New York sensibilities. Constitutional government and political incorrectness are anathema to these guilt-ridden, socially cvonscious control freaks and neocons. He was against their Rockefeller Country-Club Establishment which has been and still remains the monetary power base of the GOP to this day. I sincerely regret that he gave George the Ist the reigns after he left. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that every Presidential candidate the Rockefeller CINO Establishment has run since Reagan has been - SURPRISE! SURPRISE! - a CINO! Let's take a refresher course again: George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush, John McCain. GEE, DO WE SEE A PATTERN HERE??? This isn't rocket science, people. LEAVE THISW PARTY! They were a party Reagan hijacked for 8 years - THAT'S IT! STORY OVER! GAME OVER! YOU LOSE if you stay on their team because they're not on YOUR team and they NEVER were. You just thought they were. You've been played like a flute. So, pick yourself up and join the TRUE Conservative Revolution being led by Ron Paul, Alex Jones, Chuck Baldwin, Jerome Corsi, and so many other enlightened souls who have seen beyond the GOp smokescreen. WAKE UP!

About the Census & the Endless Socialism
Matt points out that the Census will determine how much moeny States get. EXCUSE ME, but THAT is precisely what is one of the overwhelmingly UNCONSTITUTIONAL practices by BOTH parties in DC. WHERE in the Constitution does it say that the Federal government will support massive social welfare funding for the States??? It's NOT there! The socialist powermongers and enslavers of the masses in BOTH parties justify this social policy madness with the clause "Congress shall provide for the General Welfare of the States". THIS is a gross misinterpretation of providing for "the General Welfare of the States". That is why BOTH parties in DC are BANKRUPTING the American People and the Federal government, and should be arrested and tried for dereliction of their Constitutional duty to uphold - WHAT ELSE? - the CONSTITUTION!

TBtG, the repeal of the 16th amendment
is central to the FairTax plan.

Visit http://www.FairTax.org and you will find it listed among its primary four goals.


As I mentioned before, the keys to the FairTax working in the long-run are:

1. No means testing. ALL CITIZENS get the prebate, regardless of income, and EVERYONE pays tax at retail, regardless of income. In fact, with the FairTax, our income becomes none of the gov't business.

2. NO EXCEPTIONS for retail products. If they start making exceptions for food or whatever, all the mess of lobbyists and loopholes will be back.

My contention is that if the Amendment that repeals the 16th also includes those provisions, the FairTax will serve this country well for centuries to come - including reducing the size of gov't in the long term.

To Chris
"Specific points of contention?" LMAO, right. More like "made-up lies about Huckabee that I heard someone said somewhere before."

I didn't bother to answer your "specific points" before because your comments were completely false. But if you insist...

"He's a statist. He wants to use the power of gov't to force people to act right."
Completely false. Huckabee is for less government, not no government (like you libertarians want) or bigger government (like liberals want). In fact, he is mostly in favor of self-government, but since that is impossible this day and age, so he'd prefer as little government involvement as possible. Huckabee has said many, many times that he doesn't believe it's the role of government to enforce moral behavior upon citizens. The only role of government is to prevent the public from being hurt by those that cannot self-govern themselves.

"Look at his own web-site. He wants the gov't "to act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.""
Please provide a link to where he has said this on his site. I don't believe he's ever said this but even if he has, so what? You think businesses and factories would voluntarily reduce their pollution output? Or if the government asked them nicely and said "pretty please?" You're living in your fantasy libertarian world if you think that'll happen.



To Chris pt. 2
"He's fine with the existing massive fed involvement in education, and wants to increase it with arts and music programs."
He's NOT "fine" with the current education system. In fact, he wants to shift focus away from testing and instead increase the arts and music programs that many schools have completely cut out of their ciriculum due to insufficient funding. During his Governorship, he transformed Arkansas' education system from one of the nation's worst ranked to one of the top ranked system by the time he left office.

"He's right about what needs to be done on energy, but wrong about who should do it. The gov't should get out of the way, not pick winners and losers in any industry."
You know, it's funny that you're saying these things because it's EXACTLY what Huckabee has always been saying about the role of government. He has always said that government should get out of the way of citizens and private companies. In fact, he dedicates an entire chapter in his new book "Do the Right Thing," named "Big Ideas Don't Have to Mean Big Government." You should read it sometime. And while you're at it, you should read another chapter in the same book named "The Best Government of All." Heck, you should just read the entire book before coming here to spread false information about someone you hardly have an understanding of.


To Chris pt. 3
"He talks about reducing the size of gov't by streamlining departments. No! We need to be eliminating them!"
Ahh, yes. Here's where you reveal your true political stance. Let's eliminate government so we can all live in anarchy! Isn't that what most libertarians want? Little to no government? Because government is bad and no government is good, right? Crazy libertarians pretending to be conservatives are what's wrong with the GOP these days.

"Look at Huck's comments on libertarianism. He's perfectly happy with redistribution of wealth in many cases. I'm not."
Right, because he claims to be "perfectly happy" with redistribution of wealth... more lies. He has been one of the most vocal opponents of Obama's during the entire "redistribution of wealth" controversy back during the general elections. But hey, I suppose an anti-Huckabee individual such as yourself and most of the users on this site wouldn't know because you've never watched his show. You'd rather just make stuff up about Huckabee and then lie constantly about his position and record.

"I agree with him on some issues. He's not bad on health care & guns, and good on life, marriage, taxes & the bailout. But we need a believer in limited government to turn things around, not a statist."
So you agree with him on most of important issues but then turn around and lie about and nitpick the other issues you have a problem with. Make sense. Again, don't listen to talk radio brainwashing loudmouths like Rush and Beck. Research Huckabee's positions and record, read his own words, and watch him on his own show instead of believing the lies his opponents have been spewing about him since the primaries.

@ 2010 IS LINING UP
DO NOT BE CONFUSED OBAMA NATION IS DIVIDING THE COUNTRY HAVE STOPPED BLAMING BUSH. IT IS OBAMA WARS AND HIS ENABILITY TO CLOSE GITMO. CONGRESS IS NOT GOING TO PUT AMERICANS LIVES IN DANGER. IN OTHER WORDS LISTEN UP OBAMA THE HOUSE HAVE TO SEEK REELCTION IN 2010, AND THERE WILL BE NO INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST ESCAPING FROM A PRISON IN THE UNITED STATES DESTROYING ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL FROM BEING REELECTED.
IF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY CONTINUE THE FIGHT IN THE HOUSE AND REMOVE AS MUCH DEAD WEIGHT AS THEY CAN IN THE SENATE THEY WILL BE FINE. CONTARY TO POPULAR OPINION THE OBAMANATION WILL DISSOLVE AFTER THE 2009 ELECTION THAT IS STATE AND LOCAL. THE POLLS ARE TURNING AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION AND THE DEMOCRATS AS A WHOLE HARRY REID IS LOOKING LIKE A LOST CAUSE. GET PELOSO ALSO WOULD BE A HUGE COUP EVEN IF THE DEMS STILL HAVE CONTROLL IN THE HOUSE.

You Have to Ask Yourselves HONESTLY...
Name ONE - JUST ONE - ANY - Liberal Democrat Socialist or Corporate Welfare policy the GOP ever rolled back when they had power. Yes, under Clinton, the GOP-controlled Congress led by Newt "CFR" Gingrich did support and pass the Welfare-to-Work program. Within 2 years of their Republican Revolution, they were back to showing their true colors when they ran a Liberal Moderate CINO, Bob Dole, against Clinton. Now, name how many Liberal socialist and Corporate welfare policies the've proposed and passed - Prescription Drugs Benefit, the Big Bush Wall Street Bailout, the Fannie Mae - Freddie Mac Bailout. The GOP Corporate whores like their fellow Democratic Party Corporate whores across the aisle never met a bailout they didn't like.

$53,000,000 dollars went from Wall Street and "K" Street to Congressional campaign coffers as payback to Congressional WHORES right before the November elections when they voted for the Bush bailout on September 29th immediately before their monthlong, Congressional campaign recess. These WHORES were in BOTH parties and didn't give a damn about your endless phone calls and voicemails; they just cared about their careers and social lives in DC. 27 GOP Senators supported Bush's Wall Street Bailout INSANITY against the overwhelming will to the contrary of the American People. THIS IS NOT A CONSERVATIVE OR EVEN A CONSTITUTIONAL PARTY; IT IS A CRIMINAL PARTY JUST LIKE THE OTHER ONE.

ClickClick wants links on Huck's statism
Happy to oblige. Most are from his issues page, which can be found at Huckabee's Vertical Politics Institute site:

http://www.verticalpoliticsinstitute.com/index.cfm?Fuseacti on=Issues.Home

Or you can get there by clicking on the VPI link from http://www.mikehuckabee.com


Chris: "He's a statist. He wants to use the power of gov't to force people to act right."

That's mainly from an interview I heard earlier this year where Huckabee was on Hannity's show. I'm going to try to find a transcript rather than rely on my imperfect memory.



Chris: He wants the gov't to "act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

The site actually says "we should act...", but that would require gov't force. Keep in mind we are talking about what this guy wants to do as POTUS...

CC: "You think businesses and factories would voluntarily reduce their pollution output? "

You're making my point for me. Also ... CO2 IS NOT A POLLUTANT! It's a natural byproduct of life. I agree with Huck about taking care of the earth - clean air and water are vital to our health and survival. But this climate change / CO2 thing is pure BS.


Chris: "He's fine with the existing massive fed involvement in education..."

CC: He's NOT "fine" with the current education system..."

From the VPI site: "While there is value in the 'No Child Left Behind' legislation's effort to set high standards, we need to make sure that we meet these standards."

NCLB, of course, is unconstitutional, along with all other federal gov't involvement in education.

Also from VPI: "We should codify the rights of parents to home school their children, to create more charter schools, and to benefit from public school choice."

How about just "school choice"? Why nothing about vouchers for private schools?

...

Name One Department the GOP Eliminated
They haven't even begun to dismantle the legions of bureaucracies in DC. DC itself is a welfare state for lawyers ad infinitum et ad nauseum. Do you think Ted Kennedy just wrote the 651 page law he proposed the other day? No, it was his monstrously large staff of an army of lawyers - anywhere from 60-200 lawyers. DC is a lawyers' job bank. Many Congressional staffs rival the sizes of corporate staffs in America's largest corporations. The GOP eats this sh!t up just like the DEMS. They have become part of the problem - not part of the solution. When will you people ever learn?

more Huckabee links for ClickClick
Energy:
CC: Huckabee ... has always said that government should get out of the way ...

From his VPI site: "The next President needs to send Congress a comprehensive plan for energy independence. ... We have to explore, we have to conserve, and we have to pursue all avenues of alternative energy: nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass. ... We must set aside a federal research and development budget that will be matched by the private sector to seek the best new products in alternative fuels."

He wants central planning and funding for energy. That's better than what the Dems are doing (nothing), but still statist.



Chris: "He talks about reducing the size of gov't by streamlining departments. No! We need to be eliminating them!"

CC: Ahh, yes. Here's where you reveal your true political stance. Let's eliminate government so we can all live in anarchy!"

I'm talking limited, constitutional government, not anarchy. I'm not talking about elminiating all departments - just some - the ones not dealing with powers enumerated to the federal gov't. Just looking at cabinet positions, we should keep:

State, Treasury, Defense, AG, Transportation, and possibly Interior and Commerce.

Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security should be part of Defense.

The Departments off Agriculture, Labor, HHS, HUD, Energy, Education are unconstitutional and should be ELIMINATED, not streamlined.


...

more links on Huckabee statism for CC
Chris: 'Huckabee is "perfectly happy" with redistribution of wealth...' (more lies according to CC)

I hate to link to the huffpo, but it's the only place I can find this quote. If you dispute Huckabee said this, let me know and I'll look some more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/will-mari/huckabee-on-the-nex t-repu_b_103556.html

Huck: The greatest threat to classic Republicanism is not liberalism; it's this new brand of libertarianism, which is social liberalism and economic conservatism, but it's a heartless, callous, soulless type of economic conservatism because it says "look, we want to cut taxes and eliminate government. If it means that elderly people don't get their Medicare drugs, so be it. If it means little kids go without education and healthcare, so be it." Well, that might be a quote pure economic conservative message, but it's not an American message.


I say forcing some people to pay for the health care of others is the redistribution of wealth. Please explain how that's not so.

Bush Chose to Punt on the Fair Tax
Neal Boortz points out in his follow-up book to the fair Tax that George CINO Bush had a golden Conservative opportunity to get behind the Fair Tax early on in 2005, but what did he do? He punted and gave it to a committee instead, which predictably, conveniently allowed the issue to be squelched for good and milked for its brief fleeting political victory in 2004. Bush could have championed the issue, but he was just pimping it for what he could get out of it - an election. That the GOP could never rally its imaginary legions of "fiscal" conservatives in both houses of Congress to get behind this elementary Conservative platform speaks VOLUMES about the hypocrisy of the GOP's "Conservatism".

wrapping up links for Huckabee
CC: So you agree with him on most of important issues but then turn around and lie"

So, are you ready to retract accusing me of lying? Or would you like to point out a specific example?

Also, my most important issue right now is reducing the size of the federal government. We are heading off a cliff in short order, and passing a DOMA amendment & tweaking public eduction is not going to help.

Abortion is critically important to me, but the only the a POTUS can do about it is put good justices on the SCOTUS to get RvW overturned and return the issue to the states where it belongs. For all his problems, W got that one right.


Huckabee initially appealed to me. If he had been the GOP candidate, I probably would have voted for him in November. It was only afterwards - earlier this year - that I heard some interviews with him that made me change my mind & decide not to vote for him. Talk show hosts such as Rush & Beck had nothing to do with it - it was Huckabee's own words.

chris
I hope that NONE of the GOP primary candidates run again as, this time, I will vote for NONE of them.

What about this non-news news?
Two Japanese men in their 50's have been detained as they were caught trying to cross the Italian border into Switzerland. In the false bottom of the briefcase they had there was $340B in U.S. bonds, some negotiable as cash. It is the biggest international money smuggling to date. It has not been confirmed whether the bonds are real or fake. If real, the Italian government will get a large percentage of what they discovered.

Who is keeping track of all of the trillions of dollars Obama is so busy throwing away?

Chris (again):
I'm glad you visited his Vertical Politics Institute site. A good place to begin to get educated on Huckabee's position.

"The site actually says "we should act...", but that would require gov't force. Keep in mind we are talking about what this guy wants to do as POTUS..."
You were right about him having said this. I was wrong but I did have a faint memory of him saying something similar back during the primaries. And I would agree with him on this issue. We, as citizens and good stewards of Earth should act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. What's wrong with that? You want to live in an even more polluted world, as if it wasn't already polluted enough? Oh, and when he says "we" he means everyone, not just him as POTUS or the federal government...

"You're making my point for me. Also ... CO2 IS NOT A POLLUTANT! It's a natural byproduct of life. I agree with Huck about taking care of the earth - clean air and water are vital to our health and survival. But this climate change / CO2 thing is pure BS."
Making what point for you? That without government intervention, our country would most likely rank higher than China in world-wide pollution output? You think businesses would restrict themselves? Again, you're dreaming. This is one area in which I don't mind restriction from the government, as long as it's not overly restrictive to a ridiculous degree where it will severely inhibit our companies from being able to compete with the world market.

As for your carbon dioxide / global warming argument... you do realize that greenhouse gases also includes water vapor, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and CFCs, right? And EXCESSIVE CO2 does indeed become a pollutant. I won't get into a global warming debate with you here, but to completely ignore scientific findings is just ignorant on your part.


Chris (last time):
As for NCLB... Huckabee believes the program has merits (or "value") but ultimately did not work. He doesn't really support it (nowhere does he say he supports the program) but finds that there was some good that could come out of that Bush Jr. idea. Oh, and I find it funny how you just happened to leave out the sentence before the one you quoted, where Huckabee said: "We need a clear distinction between federal and state roles in education."

Huckabee believes the role of government in education is to make sure there are standards set so that both students and teachers know where they stand. He wants the government to fire ineffective teachers and give effective ones better pay. And I agree with him. Without government, who else would there be to regulate our education system? Right, let's just allow bad teachers to keep teaching and allow the good ones to leave for greener pastures. I bet in your "constitutionally" libertarian world, you'd love for that to happen, right?

Regarding school vouchers... I thought you were for no government involvement. Now you want the government to hand out vouchers so the government can decide who can and cannot attend private schools? Man, talk about flip-flopping and not being able to make up your mind.

Rebuild the foundation
The Republican Party, no party actually, can make a comeback on a single issue, no matter how good, and the Fair Tax is a good one. Conservatives have lost basic trust in the GOP, which means the GOP is hanging on by a thread. There is a very good chance that the GOP may simply not survive. The only way out of the wilderness for them is to start getting serious about their responsibilities to conservatism and to practice it consistently.

This sounds like a simple task to the average conservative, but you would be surprised. We are not talking about a trustworthy group of people to start with--politicians tend to be amoral, power-lusting, malignant narcissists--and their entire mindset is not set up to recognize and act on principle. They must be hammered, hammered, and hammered again on every issue of importance, or else they will revert to their primordial forms. Did I mention that every politician needs to be hammered constantly?

Education
1. Ideally, I'd prefer zero gov't involvement in eduction. This was the case in the USA up until the 1850s, and we had a 97% literacy rate.

2. Constitutionally, the federal gov't should not be involved, but states can do what they want.

Realistically, I know the 1st is not going to happen in the foreseeable future, but achieving the 2nd is possible with a good batch of elected officials. It made it into the 1994 contract with America that swept the GOP into congressional power, but they couldn't get the votes...

So, granted that there will be government involvement in education at least at the state level, I'd prefer vouchers so that parents can have their kids educated at a school of their choice - public or private. This would be a good step in the right direction, and would apply competitive pressure to the public school system which would either improve it or eliminate it.


As for "a clear distinction between federal and state roles in eductation", I'll say it again - any federal role in education is unconstitutional.



Still looking for that Hannity/Huckabee radio transcript, but not having much luck...

The thing he said that really gave me a problem started off similarly to this quote:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/A+responsibility+to+care:+Mik e+Huckabee+talks+about+children,...-a0184375062

Huck: "Every law and every government program we have is a direct indictment and reflection that somewhere we've failed at the personal level to self-govern..."

He then went on to justify the myriad laws because of people failing to self-govern. Now, I agree with Huck on the role of gov't to keep people from harming each other, but he was wanting gov't to keep people from harming themselves, and I've got a big problem with that.

Who in Their Right Mind
wants their children to be educated by THIS government??? The LAST thing on Earth government knows how to do is EDUCATE, but they do a pretty damn good job of indoctrinating their future electorate. WHenever has the GOp opposed the UNCONSTITUTIONAL meddling of the Federal government in public education??? The GOP doesn't GET IT and never will. These two apostate political parties in DC just make up whatever rules they want to as they go along. After all, the Constitution as George W. Bush said, is "just a Goddamned piece of paper!" Many Constitution Party members are strong advocates of home-schooling, an idea whose time has come. Government schools are unionized, so think about it: THE GOP DOES SUPPORT UNIONS BY SUPPORTING PUBLIC EDUCATION!

chris
Huckabots like ClickClick already know that Huckabee is a statist. That is why they like him. They pretend that he is not, and they feign shock at the suggestion because they are lying psychos. That may sound unduly harsh or exaggerated, but it really is not. These people are mental cases. Hard to say how far they believe their own lies, but they are truly a cancer in Republican Party.

In his last book, Do the Right Thing, Huckabee reserved his harshest words not for the left, but for the laissez-faire conservative base. He said he resented being called a RINO by us, then proceeded to call US "faux conservatives." Yeah, he actually said that. He said he could respect leftists because they were just misguided or mistaken in their specific policy suggestions. We, on the other hand, are due the most furious condemnation for the sin of calling the Huckster out on his blatant statism and rejecting him for it, although I am sure in his psycho mind, we are evil because we won't brook the government stealing from taxpayers and otherwise enslaving the population to serve his do-gooding ends.

more about Education
I got hung up on the voucher thing and forgot to respond to this CC quote: "Without government, who else would there be to regulate our education system? Right, let's just allow bad teachers to keep teaching and allow the good ones to leave for greener pastures."

Competition is a much better regulator that gov't could ever hope to be. Let parents put kids in the schools of their choice, and the rest of this mess will naturally sort itself out.

Consider a few issues - if public schools have trouble firing bad teachers due to the union, the parents will put their kids in a different school (perhaps a non-unionized private school), and the bad teachers will be gone.

Also consider this - how many issue are debated by this country that would instantly go away if there was no gov't involvement in education?

- prayer
- sex ed
- teaching evolution vs creation
- teaching religion
- allowing Bible studies
- free speech & dress codes
on and on...
If parents simply had the choice to send their kids to competing private schools, there would be no issue of separation of church and state to consider, and those issues would be moot.

The Futility of "Hammering" GOP Whores
From "Meltdown", a book authored by Thomas E. Woods Jr of the Ludwig von Mises Institute at Auburn, Alabama that slams BOTH parties and their embrace of the insanity that is Keynesian economics, the same economics paracticed by Liberal economist, Paul Krugman, of the New York Crimes:

"When in September 2008 the House of Representatives entertained a 700 billion dollar bailout package - soon to be renamed the "rescue plan" by the Bush administration and its media accomplices - for the financial sector, the public response was swift and clear. Democratic senator Barbara Boxer of California reported receiving nearly 17,000 e-mail messages on the subject, nearly all of them negative. Of more than 2,000 calls to her California office (on a single day), only 40 callers supported it - that's 2 percent. Out of 918 callers to her Washington office, exactly one was in favor. Other members of Congress reported similar reactions. Ohio senator Sherrod Brown reported 95 percent of constituent communications on the subject were from bailout opponents.

Cont'd...

The Futility of "Hammering" GOP Whores
Cont'd...

"What could make a representative disregard so intense an expression of outrage on the part of his constituents? Take a wild guess. The securities and investment industrry (READ: WALL STREET), according to the Center for Responsive Politics, contributed $53,000,000 dollars to congressional and presidential candidates in the 2008 cycle, placing them second behind lawyers. Congressmen who voted in favor of the (Wall Street)bailout when it appeared before the House on September 29th had received 54 percent more money in campaign contributions from banks and securities firms (AGAIN: READ WALL STREET) than had those who voted against it."

THERE IT IS IN BLACK AND WHITE from page 5 of "Meltdown". See it for yourself at your local bookstore. YOUR BELOVED GOP IS NOTHING BUT A PARTY OF CORPORATE WELFARE WHORES! So you can call them and "HAMMER" them all you want, but it will do you absolutely no good. Why continue to waste your time and breath? Make the most of your time and join the Constitution Party. We "get it", and we are social conservatives.


Chris, Wendy
Don't vote for Huckabee. Forget Huckabee. It will keep your blood pressure down.

I voted for McCain because I was afraid of Obama and what he would do. Well, Obama is off to a faster start than I imagined. At least I tried to stop him by voting for the only other person who had a chance against him.

The GOP primary was so divisive that I will now say that I will not vote for any candidate who was in the GOP primary of 2008. I want to see a better choice of candidates who are LIFE-LONG conservatives (emphasis added for a purpose).

I DO NOT WANT BOBBY JINDAL TO RUN FOR POTUS OR VP in 2012; so, don't think I am pushing him. I want to see him finish a second term here in Louisiana. He is only 37 and has time to run, if ever. Meanwhile, he can do other things to serve and help this country.

Huck: Mack's Wingman in 2008?
Huck talks a good game, but his acts are something else again. He's too much of the patronizing statist pseudoconservative, IYAM, asking what he can do w/ big-gov rather than opposing big-gov. He's got religious cred, but, by the same token doesn't that make him anathema to those alleged (phantom?) secular 'independents' so afraid of theocracy out there?

Furthermore, it seems to me his big surge late in the 2008 primary race served no purpose but to take the wind out of Romney's sails & give the nod to McCain, the candidate despised for good reason by his own party's base. I'm not crazy about Romney, but he'd have been at worst more GWB, far better that Mack or Barry IMO.

I particularly have no use for anybody who lives on the anthrogenic "climate change" reservation & drinks its poison Kool-Aid. Don't throw "science" in our faces until science has been done; rubberstamping the UN & its sock puppet the IPCC is not science but propaganda.

A doctrine like anthrogenic CO2 induced climate change is extremely dangerous as it leads to totalitarian control of our economy & lives, WHICH IS WHAT THEY WANT. EVERY proposal on the table is based not on science but on arbitrary targets picked out of thin air to justify onerous controls & taxes for their own sake. A conservative would tie any ACO2ICC policy tightly to the proven science if any; only a statist or a spineless wimp careerist would do it based on arbitrary goals with politically expedient exceptions that ensure no less total actual CO2 would be emitted anyway. Mack & Huck failed the test.

DTOM - I completely agree.
The thing that amuses me about the AGW crowd (or is it ACC now?) is that they're almost all darwinists, and therefore believe the most successful species are those that best adapt to changing conditions.

They believe humans are successful because we adapted to changing conditions. But now, we're not supposed to adapt any more - we're supposed to stop conditions from changing, freeze them as they were at some arbitrary point in the near past.

This illogical goal reveals the true intent of the people behind CO2 controls - tyranny.

Religion
"it seems to me his big surge late in the 2008 primary race served no purpose but to take the wind out of Romney's sails & give the nod to McCain"

Yes, a lot of Huck's supporters didn't want a Mormon and were willing to do anything to stop it. Huckabee was so friendly with McCain that they practically held hands, yet Huck clearly loathed Romney.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.