Texans Like Mike

What Does $585,000 Buy You?

2008-01-16T15:03:00.001-06:00

Question: What does $585,000 buy you? Answer: It bought Mitt Romney backers a smear job against Mike Huckabee orchestrated by Beltway Insiders. The Club for Growth has an affiliated 527 group, Club for Growth.net, running anti-Mike Huckabee ads in early primary states. - At least $585,000 in contributions from Mitt Romney financial backers. - Club for Growth has spent $750,000 against Governor Huckabee in Iowa, South Carolina and Michigan. Here are donors that have donated both to Club for Growth.net* and Mitt Romney: Name: John Childs**Contribution to Beltway Group $100,000 on 11/16/07 $100,000 on 12/31/07 Contribution to Mitt Romney $2,100 on 1/8/07 Name: Bob Perry Contribution to Beltway Group $200,000 on 12/12/07 Contribution to Mitt Romney $2,300 on 3/13/07 Name: Kristen Hertel Contribution to Beltway Group $25,000 on 12/21/07 $25,000 on 1/02/08 Contribution to Mitt Romney $1,000 on 2/6/07 Name: Muneer Satter Contribution to Beltway Group $25,000 on 12/21/07 $25,000 on 1/02/08 Contribution to Mitt Romney $2,300 on 2/6/07Name: Michael Valentine Contribution to Beltway Group $40,000 on 1/3/08 Contribution to Mitt Romney $2,300 on 4/4/07 Name: Travis Anderson Contribution to Beltway Group $25,000 on 12/19/07 Contribution to Mitt Romney$2,100 on 2/8/07 Name: Richard Gaby Contribution to Beltway Group$20,000 on 12/19/07 Contribution to Mitt Romney$1,000 on 2/12/07 * Only represents donors that contributed more than $20,000 to Club for Growth.net in 2007/2008. ** "Boston investor John Childs, who donated $2,100 to Romney in 2007, recently gave 100,000 to the Club for Growth." [Morain, Dan. "Huckabee foes open their wallets for attack ads," The Los Angeles Times. 1 January 2008.] *** All contributor information obtained from Federal Election Commission's electronic database at www.fec.gov. Paid for by Huckabee for President, Inc. www.mikehuckabee.com

read more | digg story

President Mike Huckabee?

2008-01-07T08:01:00.000-06:00

The other republican candidates just can't figure out that the reason Huckabee is the front-runner is because people can relate to him. He is the only one that is gearing his message to the middle class. I have no doubt that the Democrats will make the same mistake against Huckabee in the general election.

by Bill Kristol

Thank you, Senator Obama. You’ve defeated Senator Clinton in Iowa. It looks as if you’re about to beat her in New Hampshire. There will be no Clinton Restoration. A nation turns its grateful eyes to you.

But gratitude for sparing us a third Clinton term only goes so far. Who, inquiring minds want to know, is going to spare us a first Obama term? After all, for all his ability and charm, Barack Obama is still a liberal Democrat. Some of us would much prefer a non-liberal and non-Democratic administration. We don’t want to increase the scope of the nanny state, we don’t want to undo the good done by the appointments of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, and we really don’t want to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory in Iraq.
For me, therefore, the most interesting moment in Saturday night’s Republican debate at St. Anselm College was when the candidates were asked what arguments they would make if they found themselves running against Obama in the general election.

The best answer came, not surprisingly, from the best Republican campaigner so far — Mike Huckabee. He began by calmly mentioning his and Obama’s contrasting views on issues from guns to life to same-sex marriage. This served to remind Republicans that these contrasts have been central to G.O.P. success over the last quarter-century, and to suggest that Huckabee could credibly and comfortably make the socially conservative case in an electorally advantageous way.

Huckabee went on to pay tribute to Obama for his ability “to touch at the core of something Americans want” in seeming to move beyond partisanship. And, he added, Senator Obama is “a likable person who has excited people about wanting to vote who have not voted in the past.” Huckabee was of course aware that in praising Obama he was recommending himself.

I was watching the debate at the home of a savvy, moderately conservative New Hampshire Republican. It was at this moment that he turned to me and said: “You know, I’ve been a huge skeptic about Huckabee. I’m still not voting for him Tuesday. But I’ve got to say — I like him.
And I wonder — could he be our strongest nominee?”

He could be. After the last two elections, featuring the well-born George Bush and Al Gore and John Kerry, Americans — even Republicans! — are ready for a likable regular guy. Huckabee seems to be that. He came up from modest origins. He served as governor of Arkansas for more than a decade. He fought a successful battle against being overweight. These may not be utterly compelling qualifications for the presidency. I’m certainly not ready to sign up.

Still, as the conservative writer Michelle Malkin put it, “For the work-hard-to-get-ahead strivers who represent the heart and soul of the G.O.P., there are obvious, powerful points of identification.” And they speak to younger voters who are not yet committed to the G.O.P. In Iowa, Huckabee did something like what Obama did on the Democratic side, albeit on a smaller scale. He drew new voters to the caucuses. And he defeated Mitt Romney by almost two to one, and John McCain by better than four to one, among voters under 45.

Now it’s true that many conservatives have serious doubts about Huckabee’s positions, especially on foreign policy, and his record, particularly on taxes. The conservative establishment is strikingly hostile to Huckabee — for both good and bad reasons. But voters seem to be enjoying making up their own minds this year. And Huckabee is a talented politician.
His campaigning in New Hampshire has been impressive. At a Friday night event at New England College in Henniker, he played bass with a local rock band, Mama Kicks. One secular New Hampshire Republican’s reaction: “Gee, he’s not some kind of crazy Christian. He’s an ordinary American.”

In general, here in New Hampshire he’s emphasized social issues far less than in Iowa (though he doesn’t waffle when asked about them). Instead he’s stressed conservative economic themes, seamlessly (if somewhat inconsistently) weaving together a pitch for limited government with a message that government needs to do more to address the concerns of the struggling middle class. This latter point seems to be resonating, as headlines in local papers announce an increase in the national unemployment rate amid speculation about a coming recession.

Some Democrats are licking their chops at the prospect of a Huckabee nomination. They shouldn’t be. For one thing, Michael Bloomberg would be tempted to run in the event of an Obama-Huckabee race — and he would most likely take votes primarily from Obama. But whatever Bloomberg does, the fact is that the Republican establishment spent 2007 underestimating Mike Huckabee. If Huckabee does win the nomination, it would be amusing if Democrats made the same mistake in 2008.

Inside Huckabee’s Victory

2008-01-04T21:44:00.000-06:00

How the impoverished governor from nowhere beat the mighty Romney machine.
By Byron York

Des Moines, Iowa — On the night before the Iowa caucuses, I dropped by Mike Huckabee’s campaign headquarters on Sixth Avenue in downtown Des Moines. Upstairs, in the phone-bank room, the scene was part political operation and part day care center; supporters who volunteered to make calls for Huckabee had brought their children, who were playing games while their parents worked the phone lists. In a cluttered side room, I sat down with Chip Saltsman, Huckabee’s campaign manager, and Robert Wickers, his media adviser, while four year-old James Yoest, the son of another Huckabee adviser, Charmaine Yoest, slept on a blanket spread across the floor.

Something was up. Saltsman and Wickers gave off a certain sense of serenity; they seemed to know that their man was doing very well. I would have suspected that they had some secret research showing that Huckabee would win the next day, but I knew the campaign didn’t have the money for such luxuries. So I listened as Saltsman gave what was essentially a play-by-play analysis of the Huckabee victory to come.

The campaign’s strategy was shaped by two things, Saltsman said. First was Huckabee’s talent as a communicator, and second was the fact that the campaign was always nearly broke. Put those two together, and you had a campaign constantly searching for free media exposure. “We’ve been criticized sometimes for — after a big event, we went straight to Washington to do media, or we went straight to New York to do media,” Saltsman said. “That was because a lot of those shows wouldn’t have us on unless we did that.”

“We didn’t have any money,” Wickers added.

“Exactly,” Saltsman said. “But we knew that was a big part of the process for us.”

So Huckabee went from show to show, and he came up with other attention-getting moves like devoting his first commercial to the now-famous “Chuck Norris” ad. “Any other campaign, that ad never gets shown,” Saltsman told me, “because you have a conference room full of consultants saying you can’t do it.” At the moment Saltsman was saying that in Des Moines, Huckabee himself was in California, sitting down to talk on The Tonight Show — perhaps the ultimate in free media. A number of commentators thought that was a blunder; Saltsman checked the number of Iowa homes tuned into the show on any given evening and thought it was a pretty good idea.

That disconnect between the conventional wisdom and Huckabee’s strategy worked time and again in the campaign’s favor. The most notable occasion was last week’s news conference in which Huckabee announced that he had created a television ad attacking Mitt Romney but had decided not air it. The national press corps laughed derisively. But Saltsman and Wickers believed that Iowans viewed it differently. What the press saw as too-clever-by-half opportunism, the voters saw as Huckabee saying, “I’ve been hit by lots of negative ads. There’s a temptation to hit back. But you know, I’m just not going to do it. It wouldn’t be right.” Huckabee came out fine.

As they put together a bare-bones, unconventional campaign, foraging on the free-media environment, the Huckabee team kept a close eye on Romney’s organization. They studied publicly available polling, which showed Huckabee moving upward, but they also paid a lot of attention to what Wickers called the Romney campaign’s “body language.” Simply put, in the final days of the race, Team Romney wasn’t acting like a winner. “If you have what you’re promoting as the best ground operation and organization in the state, that means the campaign manager is going to have on his laptop an Excel spreadsheet that identifies every hard-core Romney supporter in every county,” Wickers explained in a conversation after the caucuses. “That says, ‘We’ve got this campaign won. We’re done.’“ But the vibe coming out of the Romney campaign was different. “When Governor Romney was talking about lowering expectations, when he started to say that they were going to come back and win Iowa in November, I knew right there, that’s not a candidate who has information and data that shows he’s going to win,” Wickers told me. And indeed, Romney didn’t.

On the day of the caucuses, I checked Romney’s schedule and noticed that he was set to appear at a Kum & Go — a popular convenience store — in West Des Moines. The convenience store backdrop seemed a bit Huckabee-esque, until I arrived to discover that the event was being held not at a Kum & Go, but at the corporate headquarters of Kum & Go, a company called Krause-Gentle, which also owns a variety of other businesses. The CEO of Krause-Gentle is a Romney fan and invited him to speak there.

Before the event — one in which Romney’s appearance was jarringly preceded by a music system playing Garth Brooks drinking songs — Eric Fehrnstrom, a spokesman who had traveled with Romney all around Iowa, explained his view of the Huckabee campaign. “We’re going up against a loose confederation of fair taxers, and homeschoolers, and Bible study members, and so this will be a test to see who can generate the most bodies on caucus day,” Fehrnstrom said.

“Not that there’s anything wrong with any of those groups?” I interrupted.

“Not that there’s anything wrong, but that’s just a fact,” Fehrnstrom continued. “That’s just where he has found his support. I have a theory about why Mike Huckabee holds public events in Iowa like getting a haircut or going jogging, or actually leaving Iowa and going to California to appear on the Jay Leno show. It’s because he doesn’t have the infrastructure to plan events for him. And when he does do events in Iowa, he goes to the Pizza Ranch, where you have a built-in crowd, so you don’t have to make calls to turn people out. We’re very proud of the organization we have built in Iowa.”

Fehrnstrom, like the rest of Romney’s team, was unfailingly professional. But his analysis pointed to a blind spot in the Romney campaign, a blind spot most likely shared by the candidate himself. For all his money, and all his energy, and all his organizational skills, Romney could not put to rest the doubts many Iowa Republicans felt about his genuineness, or lack of genuineness. As they paid more attention to politics in the days leading up to the caucuses, some of those voters came to believe that Huckabee had more of that indefinable something that they want in a candidate. In the end, the race wasn’t about infrastructure at all — something Romney never figured out but Huckabee knew all along.

Latest Polls from Iowa

2008-01-03T13:14:00.001-06:00

The latest polls listed on the RealClearPolitics website list the following numbers:

American Res. Group (12/31 - 01/02) Huckabee 29%, Romney 24% (600 Likely Voters)

Zogby Tracking (12/30 - 01/02) Huckabee 31%, Romney 25% (914 Likely Voters)

InsiderAdvantage (01/01 - 01/01) Huckabee 30%, Romney 24% (430 Likely Voters)

Strategic Vision (12/28 - 12/30) Huckabee 28, Romney 30% (600 Likely Voters)

Des Moines Register (12/27 - 12/30) Huckabee 32%, Romney 26% (800 Likely Voters)

CNN (12/26 - 12/30) Huckabee 28%, Romney 31% (373 Likely Voters)

The weighted average for these polls is Huckabee 29.99%, Romney 26.35%, with the aggregate sample size equalling 3,717 voters.

Rasmussen Poll: Daily National Poll has Huckabee in 1st Place

2007-12-05T22:29:00.000-06:00

Huckabee 20%
Giuliani 17%
McCain 13%
Romney 13%
Thompson 10%

Rasmussen: Iowa Poll: Mike Huckabee 28%, Mitt Romney 25%

2007-11-28T10:07:00.001-06:00

Rudy Giuliani gets just 12% while former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson is the only other candidate in double digits at 11%. Huckabee has taken the lead! The Romney camp is really going to be attacking Huckabee now. ASk Romney if all those millions he spent in Iowa are worth it now. Huckabee's number will continue to climb as he just released a new campaign ad for Iowa.

read more | digg story

Rasmussen: Tied for 2nd Nationally

2007-11-17T20:50:00.000-06:00

by Team Huckabee

Rasmussen Reports has a new national Presidential Tracking Poll that has Governor Huckabee moving up into a tie for 2nd place.

Gaining On Clinton, Obama

2007-11-08T10:02:00.001-06:00

Rasmussen Reports takes a look at the head to head matchups between Governor Huckabee and Senator Clinton and Senator Obama.

read more | digg story

Rasmussen: Gov. Moves Into Third

2007-11-06T21:49:00.000-06:00

Rasmussen Reports new tracking poll has Governor Huckabee at 14%. He is ahead of Governor Romney and Senator McCain and behind Senator Thompson by 2%.

CNN has Governor Huckabee at 10% in their new poll.

Gov. Huckabee is in Plano this Sun 11:00am Prestonwood Baptist Church

2007-11-03T07:22:00.000-05:00

We are honored to have former Arkansas Governor and Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee join us during the 11:00 a.m. Worship Service. Governor Huckabee will bring a powerful message that will challenge our congregation. Be sure to invite your friends and neighbors on Sunday for a great opportunity to hear from one of our nation's leaders. Go here for more details.

Evangelical Outpost: CFG Rebuttal

2007-10-30T21:30:00.000-05:00

Check out this great article written by Joe Carter on his blog Evangelical Outpost. He writes a great rebuttal to all of these group that keep attacking Gov. Huckabee's fiscal record. It is a long article, but it is well worth it.

Fiscally Flawed? -- A Rebuttal to the Club for Growth

After being elected Governor of California in 1967, Ronald Reagan reneged on a campaign promise and signed into law the single biggest tax increase in the state's history: $1 billion. (At the time, the total state budget was only about $5 billion. Adjusted for inflation and population growth, the increase in today's dollars would be $10 billion.)

If the Club for Growth had been around in 1980, Reagan might not have become President. The influential fiscal conservative group would surely have done everything in their power to prevent the Gipper from gaining the nomination. They would have attempted to derail Reagan's campaign just as they are now doing to Gov. Huckabee.

For several months the Club for Growth has been attacking Huckabee's bona fides as a fiscal conservative. In the process, they've slandered the Governor's record, deceived numerous trusting conservatives, and cast doubts on the organization's honesty and trustworthiness. It's a disgraceful situation made all the more shameful by our continued willingness to be duped.
In January when Huckabee announced he was forming an exploratory committee, the CFG released a white paper on the Governor's record. (Oddly, Huckabee was the first candidate scrutinized even though he entered the race after McCain, Giuliani, Brownback, and Romney. For some reason, the CFG thought he was worthy of moving to the head of the line.) The following is an analysis of their white paper examining the question, "Is Arkansas Governor
Mike Huckabee a Pro-Growth, Economic Conservative?"

The CFG begins by grudgingly admitting Huckabee's accomplishments:
Governor Huckabee touts himself as an economic conservative, writing in his biography that he "pushed through the Arkansas legislature the first major, broad-based tax cuts in state history" and "led efforts to establish a Property Taxpayers' Bill of Rights" early on as governor (Arkansas Times 09/22/05), but he only offers a small piece of the picture. It is true that Governor Huckabee fought for an $80 million tax cut package in 1997 that was passed by the Arkansas legislature (Cato Policy Analysis No. 315, 09/03/98); cut the state capital gains tax in 1999 (The Commercial Appeal 02/29/99); and passed the Property Taxpayers' Bill of Rights in the same year, limiting the increase in property taxes to 10% a year for individuals and 5% per taxing unit (AP 03/16/99).

Before the CFG attempts to downplay these significant actions, let's take another look at what they've admitted he was able to accomplish:

Pushed through a Democrat legislature the first, major broad based tax cuts in the state's history.

Pushed through a Democrat legislature an $80 million tax cut package.

Cut the state's capital gains tax by 25%.

Established a Property Taxpayers' Bill of Rights

Limited the increase in property taxes to 10% a year for individuals and 5% per taxing unit

Here are a few that they left off the list:

Eliminated the income tax for families below the poverty line.

Increased the standard deductions.

Eliminated the marriage penalty.

Eliminated bracket creep by indexing the income taxes to inflation, thereby preventing taxpayers from moving into a higher bracket when their paychecks increase due to inflations.

Doubled the child care tax credit.

Eliminated capital gains tax on the sale of a home.

Now let's move on to the hit piece section of their analysis:

However, his record over the rest of his ten-year tenure tells a starkly different story.
A starkly different story? They imply that Huckabee made some radical tax increases that offset the cut in capital gains, the $80 million tax cut, and the other fiscally conservative policies. As you'll see, though, they have to dig deep to come up with any damning evidence to build their case:

Immediately upon taking office, Governor Huckabee signed a sales tax hike in 1996 to fund the Games and Fishing Commission and the Department of Parks and Tourism (Cato Policy Analysis No. 315, 09/03/98).

According to the Cato report cited:

Upon taking office in July 1996, Huckabee immediately backed a 1/8-cent sales tax hike to fund the Games and Fishing Commission and the Department of Parks and Tourism. The voters enacted that hike as a constitutional amendment in November 1996.Huckabee didn’t "sign a sales tax hike." An overwhelming 80% of the voters chose to do so through an amendment to their state's constitution.

Notice they also left off the rest of what Cato said:

In his first budget, however, he redeemed himself by proposing a sweeping overhaul of Arkansas's archaic income tax system. The $80 million tax cut package was enacted in 1997 and became the first broad-based state tax cut in more than 20 years. It increased the standard deduction, eliminated the income tax "marriage penalty," and indexed the state tax brackets for inflation.

He supported an internet sales tax in 2001 (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07).
Indeed, Huckabee joined 43 other governors in sending a "strong and unified message to Congress: deal fairly with Main Street retailers, consumers, and local governments."
The letter said, "If you care about a level playing field for Main Street retail businesses and local control of states, local governments, and schools, extend the moratorium on taxing Internet access ONLY with authorization for the states to streamline and simplify the existing sales tax system. To do otherwise perpetuates a fundamental inequity and ignores a growing problem….The loophole creates serious budget problems for schools, states, and local governments. A study estimated that states could lose as much as $14 billion by 2004 if they are unable to collect existing taxes on Web-based sales. Nearly half of state revenues come from sales taxes."

So Huckabee wanted his state to be the one to determine whether sales taxes were collected from goods sold within the state. Where are the defenders of federalism on that issue?
He publicly opposed the repeal of a sales tax on groceries and medicine in 2002 (Arkansas News Bureau 08/30/02).

What the CFG fails to note is that Arkansas law prohibits deficits and requires that the state budget be balanced. Because 89¢ of every general revenue tax dollar in Arkansas is spent on education, health, and human services, repealing that sales tax without instituting another tax would have required cutting needed services.

He signed bills raising taxes on gasoline (1999), cigarettes (2003) (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07), and a $5.25 per day bed-tax on private nursing home patients in 2001 (Arkansas New Bureau 03/01/01).

Again it should be noted that 90% of the state budget is spent on education, health, and human services. While the CFG are tax radicals that believe that such entitlements as education and highways should be done away with, most residents of Arkansas understand that taxes on gas are the way that revenue for road repair is generated.

In 2004, he allowed a 17% sales tax increase to become law (The Gurdon Times 03/02/04).
Notice the odd wording, "allowed…to become law"? Here is how the Cato Institute report describes it:

In response to a court order to increase spending on education, Huckabee proposed another sales tax increase, and the legislature sent to him a smaller sales tax increase with a corporate franchise tax to make up the difference. Hucakbee let it become law without his signature.
Complying with a court order is "allowing" something to happen?

He proposed another sales take hike in 2002 to fund education improvements(Arkansas News Bureau 12/05/02).

He wanted to raise funds to improve education? What is he, a Democrat?
In Arkansas, 49% of the tax revenue comes from Sales/Use taxes. Such increases were required to meet the legal requirement to balance the budget. Now I'm sure the CFG believes that balanced budgets are a bad idea. But that is something they should blame on the citizens of Arkansas rather than on the Governor.

He opposed a congressional measure to ban internet taxes in 2003 (Arkansas News Bureau 11/21/03).

So he opposed a federal measure that prevented the states from collecting taxes owed to them? Obviously, the CFG doesn’t have much use for the concept of federalism.
By the end of his ten-year tenure, Governor Huckabee was responsible for a 37% higher sales tax in Arkansas, 16% higher motor fuel taxes, and 103% higher cigarette taxes according to Americans for Tax Reform (01/07/07),…

A 37% increase annualized over 10 years is close to, if not less than, the annual rate of inflation. Why does the CFG not point that out. Are they intentionally being misleading? As Chris L. points out in the comments, this is a sales tax and thus not adjusted for inflation. I apologize for that error. I thought the CFG was using the percentages to be misleading, it didn't occur to me just how misleading they were willing to be. The CFG doesn’t provide the baseline tax rate so let's go with the current rate of 6%. If Huckabee increased the rate by 36%, then he raised the sales tax .0384 cents during his ten years in office. By using the percentage rather than the actual total increase, they are able to make it sound much more nefarious.
Also, a governor cuts income and capital gains taxes and they whine because he increased sin taxes in order to balance the budget?

…garnering a lifetime grade of D from the free-market Cato Institute.

I'm not sure exactly why fiscal conservatives should care how a libertarian think tank grades a candidate. Perhaps the CFG couldn’t find a conservative group that would aid them in their hit piece. Unfortunately, Cato's analysis is as weak as CFG's:

Thanks to a final term grade of F, Huckabee earns an overall grade of D for his entire governorship. Like many Republicans, his grades dropped the longer he stayed in office. In his first few years, he fought hard for a sweeping $70 million tax cut package that was the first broad-based tax cut in the state in more than 20 years. He even signed a bill to cut the state's 6 percent capital gains tax-a significant progrowth accomplishment. But nine days after being reelected in 2002, he proposed a sales tax increase to cover a budget deficit caused partly by large spending increases that he proposed and approved, including an expansion in Medicare eligibility that Huckabee made a centerpiece of his 1997 agenda. He agreed to a 3 percent income tax "surcharge" and a 25-cent cigarette tax increase. In response to a court order to increase spending on education, Huckabee proposed another sales tax increase.
After praising his accomplishments, Cato bashes Huckabee for proposing a sales tax to "cover a budget deficit caused partly by large spending increases that he proposed and approved…" Again, 90% of the Arkansas state budget is on education, health, and human services. I realize that the libertarians at Cato consider it blasphemous to have the state funding schools or paying the medical bills of the poor. But complying with state law in order to balance the budget and pay for such entitlements does not make a politician a "big-government conservative." (And they wonder why we don't put the libertarians in charge?)

The CFG then moves on to "spending":

Under Governor Huckabee's watch, state spending increased a whopping 65.3% from 1996 to 2004, three times the rate of inflation (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07).
That's odd. This week CFG president Pat Toomey claimed in an article at NRO, "…on his watch, and frequently at his behest, state spending increased by 50 percent, more than double the rate of inflation,…" Perhaps Toomey's ghost writer recalculated since his organization's last hit piece so let's use the latest figure. When Toomey says spending increased by 50%, that's 4.1%. Toomey notes that it was twice the rate of inflation, but ignores population growth (13.7% from 1990 to 2000). An increase in population means that there are more people who require--once again--education, health, and human services.

The number of state government workers rose 20% during his tenure (Arkansas Leader 04/15/06),…

CFG fails to note that the population also increased during that time. Someone has to teach the 449,000 public school children in kindergarten through grade 12 and the 100,000 students in college. Should the number of government workers--including teachers--decrease as the population increases?

…and the state's general obligation debt shot up by almost $1 billion, according to Americans for Tax Reform.

Let's put that claim in perspective: Arkansas spent $1.9 billion this year on public schools. An additional billion dollars could be accounted for in a 10% annual increase in the education budget. Considering that the population increased by 13%, that number seems remarkably low. Even if all other categories didn't increase at all, we should expect the education funding to increase by that amount.

The massive increase in government spending is due in part to the number of new programs and expansion of already existing programs initiated by Governor Huckabee, including ARKids First, a multimillion-dollar government program to provide health coverage for thousands of Arkansas' children (Arkansas News Bureau 04/13/06).

The ArKids First program provides health care coverage of Arkansas' uninsured low income children. If conservatives want to ensure that the Democrats remain in power for the next decade, let's publicly bash any politician that wants to provide health care for indigent children. Ironically, CFG includes a section on School Choice in which they claim that, "More competition in education can only lead to higher quality and lower costs." How can they support state funded education when they complain about complying with court-mandated tax raises to pay for said funding? How do they expect to pay for education when they oppose all taxes? And wouldn't increased quality require increasing the number, if not the pay, of the subset of government workers known as teachers? Does the CFG have any internally consistent logic when it comes to their critiques?

.(In order to limit the length of this post, I'll refrain from commenting on the Free Trade, Entitlement Reform, Regulation, Political Free Speech, and Tort Reform sections. They are either positive about him in those areas or having niggling concerns.)

I'm embarrassed that I initially relied on Andrew Roth's white paper when I formed my first impression of Gov. Huckabee. I'm even more embarrassed that others that have read this sloppy analysis believe it is a damning indictment. I've always considered The Club for Growth to be a respectable conservative organization. But their attempts to deceive their fellow conservatives by misrepresenting Huckabee's record have proven they are unworthy of such trust. Pat Toomey and his organization owe Governor Huckabee--and the rest of us--an apology for their attempted deception.

Permalink email: Joe Carter email this link trackback

Rasmussen: Huckabee Tied for 3rd

2007-10-29T20:58:00.000-05:00

Governor Huckabee moved up another % point nationally into a tie with Senator McCain for 3rd place. Click here for the details.

Rasmussen: Huckabee Passes Romney!

2007-10-26T19:53:00.000-05:00

More good news on the polling front. Gov. Huckabee passed Gov. Romney today in the Rasmussen Reports Daily Tracking.

Rasmussen National Poll: Huckabee passes Romney
From Rasmussen Reports - October 26, 2007

Rudy Giuliani 20%

Fred Thompson 19%

John McCain 14%

Huckabee 12%

Mitt Romney 11%

Fund's WSJ column on Huckabee misleading

2007-10-26T19:34:00.000-05:00

Please take a moment and read this article. This is an excellent piece written by Lucas Roebuck concerning an article in the WSJ by John Fund and the lies that some of the media are trying to spread about Huckabee. With great success comes trails.

Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:48 am
Post subject: Fund's WSJ column on Huckabee misleading

John Fund had a negative column about Huckabee in today's WSJ. I have written a rebuttal. The Fund column can be found here: http://opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110010782

The rebuttal can be found below or here: http://roebuckreport.blogspot.com/2007/10/funds-column-assassination-of-huckabee.html

Fund's verbal assassination of Huckabee misleading
By Lucas Roebuck

Manhattan myopia fueled by the natural tension between fiscal and social conservatism seems to be the modus operandi of the assassination piece against former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in Friday’s Wall Street Journal, penned by John Fund, one of the Journal’s leading editorial voices.

Fund attempts to make the case that Huckabee is “not the ‘consistent conservative’ he claims to be.” However, instead of constructing a well-researched case of examples of Huckabee’s supposed conservative inconsistencies, Fund strings together a handful of individuals who simply accuse Huckabee of being liberal with little or no factual support. Furthermore, what little evidence Fund does present is skewed by critical omissions of relevant fact.

Huckabee is obviously a stronger conservative on social issues than on fiscal ones, which is the opposite of Mayor Rudy Giuliani, hometown favorite of the Manhattan GOP crowd. The Journal, based in New York City, values fiscal conservatism over social conservatism, so the worst kept secret is the group-think going on among the opinion writers at the Journal favors Giuliani.

Fiscal conservatives have become frustrated with their weakening influence in the GOP (not that I blame them) and have grown to resent social conservatives reign over the Republican party since President Bush took office in 2001. Also, the elite in the GOP have always looked down on their mostly Southern social conservative allies, and this is particular true for the Journal, which often, like much of the mainstream media, can’t see very well beyond the shores of Manhattan. Fund’s column against Huckabee embodies this frustration. Huckabee’s gaining in Iowa polls, and he is the strongest social conservative hands down among GOP candidates, so naturally he is drawing fire from the GOP elite.

The strongest case against Huckabee’s fiscally conservative record in Fund’s column is Fund’s implication that Huckabee raised the gas tax in Arkansas to pay for road repair for Arkansas dilapidated interstate system. (I would argue, even on a philosophic level, that raising gas taxes to pay for roads is not necessarily contradictory to fiscal conservatism.*)

I say that Fund implied Huckabee raised the tax, because Fund knows saying outright that Huckabee raised the tax would be inaccurate. Fund refers to Huckabee’s “efforts to raise taxes to repair roads” and cites a state senator who said Huckabee urged him to “back a gas tax increase.”

What Fund omits from his column is that this tax was a referendum in 1999 put out to be voted on by the people of Arkansas, not something imposed by a state legislature and signed into law by a governor. The people of Arkansas spoke at the ballot box, and through direct democracy, imposed the tax on themselves.

If you want the bottom line on Huckabee’s tax policy, as Fund points out, Huckabee has signed the Americans For Tax Reform no new tax pledge. Rudy has not signed the pledge.

As an Arkansas journalist for nearly a decade, I had a unique opportunity to observe Huckabee’s character. I believe Mike Huckabee is a man of his word and if elected president, will not raise taxes.

Fund, quoting Arkansas Business scribe Blant Hurt, points out that Arkansas spending rose faster than the inflation rate and sales taxes were raised during Huckabee’s tenure. Both of these facts are true, but the tax increase was the result of an Arkansas Supreme Court order in the Lake View school funding lawsuit that Huckabee fought, but lost – another fact Fund failed to mention.

Education eats the lion’s share of state expenditures, inflating the rate of increase of state spending. Lake View was a horrible court decision, and I fought it on the editorial pages at the time as Huckabee fought it in court. To use the results of the forced tax increase (and forced spending of that new revenue) as proof Huckabee isn’t really fiscally conservative is erroneous at best, if not deceptive.

Fund also trots out Huckabee’s enemies in the Eagle Forum, who take the opportunity to blame Huckabee for the Arkansas Republican Party woes. This statement is patently ridiculous. While Huckabee was governor, Republicans gained ground in the state house up until 2006, which as we know, was not a banner year for Republicans nationwide. When Huckabee was on the ballot, Republicans won more offices than they had since Reconstruction. Huckabee was always one of the most popular politicians in office, according the the University of Arkansas’ Arkansas Poll, conducted annually.

The Eagle Forum doesn’t like Huckabee because he doesn’t take the hardest line against illegal immigration. He specifically earned the groups ire when he supported a bill (which failed) that would have allowed children of illegal immigrants who were applying to become citizens access to merit based state scholarships.

If an absolute hard line on immigration is more important to you than say, ending abortion, then Huckabee isn’t your candidate. Huckabee says on immigration, “My number one priority is to secure America’s border” and “those caught trying to enter the country illegally must be detained, processed and deported” (as opposed to catch and release). Still, Rep. Tom Tancredo is farther to the right than Huckabee on immigration, so send your donations to Tancredo if this is your primary voting issue. Of course, Huckabee is as conservative or more conservative on immigration than former Mayor Rudy Guiliani, Sen. John McCain and former Gov. Mitt Romney.

Fund is either ignorant that the immigration issue is at the heart of the Eagle Forum opposition to Huckabee or disingenuous. Fund and his fellows on the Wall Street Journal are well known for being centrists on immigration reform. The Journal certainly is as centrist or even more so on immigration than Huckabee, which is probably why Fund didn’t give context to the Eagle Forum comments.

As far as blaming Huckabee for the GOP woes in Arkansas, the Republican Party in that state stared unravelling in 2002, when the social conservatives turned on Sen. Tim Hutchinson, largely because of his divorce and remarriage to a former staffer. This gave rise to pure ideologues like Jim Holt, who twice was able to win the GOP nomination for statewide races (once for U.S. Senate, once for Lt. Governor), but was unable to assemble a winning general election campaign. Don’t get me wrong, Holt worked hard and was more conservative, both fiscally and socially than President Reagan, but lacked Reagan (and Huckabee’s) communication skills. Unfortunately Holt, who managed to alienate nearly every Republican in the state legislature, was not savvy enough to beat the persecution of the Arkansas press.

Tim Hutchinson’s fall from grace also tainted (unfairly) his brother, Asa, who was the Republican who ran to replace the term-limited Huckabee. (Asa, whom I supported, was uncontested in the GOP primary, because of the sudden death from cancer of Lt. Governor Win Rockefeller, a moderate Republican who was as popular as Huckabee statewide.)

In considering Huckabee’s social conservatism, Fund either is talking out of both sides of his mouth or implying Huckabee is hypocrite. In one sentence, Fund describes Huckabee as “running hard right” on social issues, but then cites Texas judge Paul Pressler, who "led the conservative Southern Baptist revolt" saying that Huckabee “never appointed conservatives while he headed the Arkansas Baptist Convention.” Fiscal conservatives? Theological conservatives? Social conservatives? Those who like conservative hymns instead of guitar-led worship? In his weak attempt to discredit Huckabee, Fund doesn’t say — another omission.

At any rate, Huckabee’s social conservative track record is unrivaled by any one else in the GOP field. Front runners Romney, Giuliani, McCain and actor Fred Thompson don’t even come close to the consistency of Huckabee’s social conservatism, which is ultimately where Fund’s analysis of Huckabee falls apart. When Huckabee is talking about being consistently conservative, he is talking about the promotion of the sanctity of life, opposition to gay marriage and other core social conservative values that his opponents have flip flopped on enough times to rival John Kerry.

Every year while governor, Huckabee led the line in Arkansas’ annual Right to Life march. Huckabee also led efforts to pass a state constitutional amendment recognizing marriage as a bond between one man and one woman. Finally, Huckabee was proactive in helping to strengthen marriages in Arkansas by promoting “Covenant Marriages” as an option in Arkansas, where couples must see counseling before a judge will grant a divorce on grounds of convenience.

Huckabee is not the perfect candidate. HIs flirting with carbon credits and his weak stance against SCHIP expansion, both noted by Fund, don’t thrill me.

But who can I count on to strongly oppose the infanticide going on in this country? Not Giuliani, who is self-described as pro-choice, nor Romney, who flips on issues like abortion for political expedience. Who can I trust not to raise taxes? Not Giuliani, who won’t sign an anti-tax pledge, nor Romeny — again, whose flip-flopping ruins his credibility.

Contrary to Fund’s assertion that Huckabee is an inconsistent conservative, Huckabee is a social conservative I know I can count on.

REVISIONS HISTORY: Corrected the date of Tim Hutchinson's defeat, and correctly attributed a quote to Paul Pressler instead of Rick Scarborough. Thanks to those of you who pointed out these errors. *

Even hard core fiscal conservatives agree that the government must be involved in some public works projects — like roads. Few people — if any — would argue that creating a healthy system of roads is not one of the government’s primary responsibilities. I would also argue that if you are going to have a tax, making those who directly benefit from the service the tax will provide, i.e. those who drive on roads (or rather, who buy gas), pay for the tax is also fiscally conservative — as opposed to some “progressive” income tax or universal sales tax.

Lucas Roebuck is the former opinion page editor of the Benton County Daily Record, former assignment editor for KNWA-NBC, and former managing editor for the Northwest Arkansas Times and Siloam Springs Herald-Leader.

Huckabee " The Tortoise and the Hares"

2007-10-26T18:32:00.000-05:00

This is from the Des Moines Register’s political cartoonist, Brian Duffy.

Huckabee in Double Digits Nationally!

2007-10-25T20:26:00.000-05:00

Gov. Huckabee rose to 10% in the polls nationally and just 2% behind Gov. Romney. He is also now within the margin of error for both Romney and McCain.

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
Thursday, October 25, 2007

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows a very tight race for the Republican Presidential Nomination. Rudy Giuliani is now supported by 21% while Fred Thompson is the top choice for 19%. Seventeen percent (17%) are undecided while John McCain moves into third place among the candidates with at 14% of the vote. Mitt Romney’s support is back down to 12%, Mike Huckabee reaches double digits for the first time at 10%, and Ron Paul earns the vote from 3%. (see recent daily numbers). The more you look at the numbers, the more you realize how wide open the race has become.

The GOP's Best Bet?

2007-10-23T20:43:00.000-05:00

Huckabee is starting get some very good media attention from his success at the value voters summit and than the Debate. The more we see these types of articles my hope is more of the social conservatives will realize that Huckabee is their only chance.

By Jonathan Alter
Newsweek Web Exclusive
Updated: 12:25 PM ET Oct 22, 2007

The GOP is in a deep hole and keeps digging. Even after Mike Huckabee won big among attendees at last week's "Values Voters Convention," many evangelicals have been telling the former Arkansas governor—and onetime Baptist minister—that they like him but won't back him because he can't beat Hillary Clinton. They have it exactly backward. He may be the only Republican candidate with a decent chance to beat the Democrats next November.

Huckabee? Yes, Huckabee.

To explain why, let's look at the shortcomings of the other Republican candidates first.
Rudy Giuliani's performance so far has turned the conventional wisdom about him on its head. It was assumed early on that he couldn't win the GOP nomination because of his position on social issues like abortion, gun control and gay rights, but that if he did his moderation would power him to victory in the general election. Now it looks as though he's got a strong chance for the nomination—despite his GOP rivals' best efforts to hammer him for being insufficiently conservative during Sunday night's debate—but would likely fail in November.

While Giuliani appears strong in his native Northeast, his recent pandering to the conservative base will make it hard for him to put states like New York and New Jersey in play. As Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania told Chris Matthews on "Hardball" last week, Giuliani's right-wing positions on Iraq, S-CHIP and the need for anti-abortion Supreme Court justices are all deeply unpopular in Blue States and would be hung around his neck next fall. Meanwhile, a pro-life third-party effort (a greater likelihood whenever Republicans nominate a pro-choice candidate for any major office) would strip away a few crucial points in key states. At a minimum, pro-lifers would stay home.

Most important, Giuliani is a dark candidate running on fear. Americans like light candidates running on hope. Since 1928 the United States has only once elected the darker candidate, Richard Nixon in 1968. But circumstances were quite different then. The unpopular war that year was a problem for the Democratic nominee, Hubert Humphrey—whose "politics of joy" sounded lame in that crazy season. Nixon tried to lighten up in 1968 with the "new Nixon" (just as Giuliani is trying to smile more this year), but his victory and reelection in 1972 were triumphs of the dark side.

This time, Rudy would be forced into the Humphrey role, saddled with the incumbent president's baggage. Running in full-throated support of George Bush's war with Iraq (much less Iran) is not likely to be a crowd-pleaser. And his claim to possess greater experience than his rivals will likely fall flat, considering that no one has ever made it from city hall to the White House without serving in some other office in between. Six long years after 9/11, Rudy's "only thing we have to use is fear itself" strategy will work only if we're attacked again by terrorists. (In that case, of course, all bets are off.)

Mitt Romney at first seemed the most Reaganesque character in the Republican field. But he is running a transparently cynical campaign. (Cynicism can bring success, but only if you can't see it). His flip-flopping is so egregious he makes John Kerry seem like a paragon of principle, and the Democrats now have the money and discipline to exploit the opening. Romney, born in privilege and cosseted throughout his life by his church and corporate America, has no common touch. And his Mormonism would hurt him in some quarters in a general election.

Fred Thompson is not ready for prime time. Unless he gets real good real fast, he would be crushed by any Democrat. He made strides Sunday night—but he's not there yet.

John McCain would do better than the other three, but even if he somehow gets the nomination, he feels a bit like Bob Dole in 1996: an amusing war hero with a good heart and lots of friends in the press who is well past his sell-by date and gets pummeled by a Clinton.

That leaves Huckabee, whose shortage of funds will probably prevent him from being nominated. The schedule is so front-loaded this time that even an impressive showing on January 3 in Iowa (and he's running second there in some recent polls) won't bring him enough money to be fully competitive on Tsunami Tuesday, February 5. And many Republicans have gotten into the habit of viewing lack of money as a character flaw. His only hope is that party leaders come to their senses and recognize that he's their best bet.

Huckabee comes across more hopeful than Giuliani, more believable than Romney, more intelligent than Thompson and fresher than McCain. He would hold the base and capture moderates drawn to his down-home style. His greatest asset is that he alone among the Republicans "speaks American." He connects to his audience with stories and metaphors and a geniality that can't be faked. "I'm conservative but I'm not angry about it," he likes to say, and it's true; his gentle mocking of the intraparty warfare that broke out during the Fox debate—likening it to a "demolition derby"—confirms the point. This was Reagan's secret, and it worked for Huckabee in Arkansas, where he won the votes of independents and Democrats.

The rap on Huckabee is that while he can speak fluently on global affairs, he has no foreign-policy chops. But that might be an advantage in November. Because he lacks Washington experience, Huckabee is the GOP candidate least tied to Iraq, which will remain an albatross for any Republican. And unless you believe 9/11 "changed everything" for American voters (if so, how do you explain 2006?), this election may revert to the norm, which means an emphasis on pocketbook issues. In the Detroit debate on the economy earlier this month, only Huckabee spoke with any passion about the millions of voters left out of the economic expansion. It's trendy now for Republicans to talk about their fiscal principles, but belt-tightening and fealty to Wall Street have never won a presidential election.

Voters in general elections are less ideological than in primaries and more intrigued by a compelling personal narrative. Huckabee's story hits closer to home than any other. After chest pains and a diagnosis of diabetes, he lost more than 100 pounds with diet and exercise. He tells the story with wit and grace (as well as the one about his wife's cancer diagnosis many years ago) and would kill on Oprah. When Huckabee talks about broader health-care issues he does more than brag about Arkansas's success under his leadership. He speaks in a folksy and comprehensible way that would match up well against Hillary's facts and figures or Obama's abstractions. The same holds true on education; his support for large-scale federal support of art and music programs to improve creativity (and thus competitiveness in the global economy) would resonate with millions of voters.

Even on faith and politics, Mike is easy to like. From afar he seemed extreme because he raised his hand in a debate when the candidates were asked en masse if they believed in evolution. But when Bill Maher pressed him to justify that view on his HBO show, Huckabee responded with a nuanced and presentable discussion of the origins of the universe that seemed to pacify even the atheist host. (I found this as well when we discussed the subject some months ago.) He has surely said some wacky right-wing things that could be used against him, but no more than any of the others in the Republican field. (He said in the debate that "most" of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were clergymen; only a couple were.)

The stridency of today's GOP has blinded the party to the context of this election, which is Bush fatigue. No wonder all the Democrats are using some variation of the line "The era of cowboy diplomacy is over." It is. And the least cowboyish and bombastic Republican will have the best chance a year from now to win the White House. That's Mike Huckabee.

Chuck Norris Endorses Mike Huckabee

2007-10-23T20:25:00.000-05:00

I was very excited when I heard about this. Chuck Norris is a huge endorsement for this campaign to get. According to Mike he thinks the endorsement is one of the factors for our great success lately in fundraising. I can only hope this endorsement will only lead to more people coming out and announcing their support of Mike.

My choice for president
Posted: October 21, 20078:20 p.m. Eastern
Former Gov. Mike Huckabee

A short time ago, I wrote in jest about what I would do if I am elected president. Of course, that was written all in good fun.

Like most of you, over the summer and into the fall, I've been watching, listening, studying and praying about who could lead this country as our next president.

I won't leave you in suspense. Though Giuliani might be savvy enough to lead people, Fred Thompson wise enough to wade through the tides of politics, McCain tough enough to fight terrorism and Romney business-minded enough to grow our economy, I believe the only one who has all of the characteristics to lead America forward into the future is ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

Newt Gingrich called Mike "very effective … if Huckabee can find money, he will be dramatically competitive almost overnight." Bill Clinton called Huckabee the "only dark horse that's got any kind of chance … He's the best speaker they've got." There is even a pro-Huckabee swell rising among the younger generation.

Who he is (before what he can do)

More than anything he has done or can do, however, it is first who Mike is that impresses me most.

Part of our backward culture is reflected in the fact that we measure and value people by what they do, instead of first who they are. As a result, we nominate charisma, cast votes for articulation and repeatedly elect too many paper-thin corrupt politicians. Of course, I want a president who gets things done, but I first want one who has lived a life of integrity, commitment, truthfulness and respect. Mike is that man.

Mike hasn't lived an isolated, out-of-touch life like so many politicians. He was raised in Hope, Ark., with a dad who was a firefighter and always had a second job. Mike and his sister grew up poor, not privileged. He was the first person in his family to graduate from high school. And he worked two jobs in college and graduated in two-and-a-half years. He is an outdoorsman too – an avid fisherman, hunter and a long-term member of the NRA.

Mike is a committed husband and father. He has always prioritized his family before politics. His wife, two sons and daughter speak his highest praise.

Mike has also faced unique adversity, from helping a young wife endure the trials of spinal cancer to aiding the victims of hurricane Katrina as the governor of Arkansas. He has a heart for helping and will fight for the causes of average citizens. He is known for having a compassionate heart, genuinely caring for all people.

Mike is also a respected and fearless leader, and he does not cower to the cries of any majority or minority. He doesn't abandon his values for what's expedient. Like our Founding Fathers, he's not afraid to stand up for a Creator and against secularist beliefs. At the same time, he doesn't fear offending Christian leaders who give up their values in pursuit of electing their "team leader" just like everyone else.

A track record toward the presidency

Mike Huckabee has already proven his ability to lead our citizens as a lieutenant governor for three years in 1993 and governor of Arkansas for the following 10 years. Time magazine called him one of the best governors in America.

As governor, Mike led the citizens of Arkansas through difficult conditions. He balanced the budget each year, enhanced technology in commerce, was tough on crime, used tobacco lawsuit monies to better health care, initiated a toll-free hotline to report tips on government corruption and 16 times had to endure the long nights of the soul before he gave permission for executions to proceed. He also initiated the ARKids First program, cutting the number of uninsured children in half.

It's not a coincidence that four out of the last five presidents we've had were governors because they proved their abilities, perseverance and heart for running our country by serving in those state capacities. As New Man men's magazine (July/August 2007) said, "His proven ability to cast a compelling vision, as he did while governor, that transcends party, ideology and class might enable America to unite and begin to heal, an especially important goal at this point in our history."

Where he stands, and what he will do

Mike Huckabee will fight for the issues that lead us safely, and with prosperity, into the future. Here are several of his positions in his own words (to read or watch Mike speak about the issues, click the title)

Reviving healthcare – "The health care system in this country is irrevocably broken. … As president, I will work with the private sector, Congress, health care providers and other concerned parties to lead a complete overhaul of our health care system."

Implementing a FairTax – "I support the FairTax. As governor of Arkansas, I cut taxes and fees almost 100 times, saving the taxpayers almost $380 million. I left a surplus of nearly $850 million, which I urged should go back to the people. Our massive deficit is not due to Americans being under-taxed, but to the government's over-spending."

Creating more choices for education – "I believe that every child should have the opportunity for a quality education that teaches the fundamental skills needed to compete in a global economy. … Test scores rose dramatically when I was governor of Arkansas because of my education reforms."

Stopping illegal immigration –"My number one priority is to secure America's border."

Winning the war on terror – "I believe that we are currently engaged in a world war. This war is not a conventional war, and these terrorists are not a conventional enemy. … With a focus on renewed diplomacy and inclusion, we can accomplish the goals of our nation without having to go it alone."

Saving marriage – "I support, and have consistently supported, passage of a federal constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. … As governor of Arkansas, I led the successful effort to pass a similar state constitutional amendment in 2002."

Protecting the right to life – "I support, and have always supported, passage of a constitutional amendment to protect the right to life."

Achieving energy independence –"The first thing I will do as president is send Congress my comprehensive plan for energy independence. We will achieve energy independence by the end of my second term."

(I will address the whys of these and other positions in upcoming articles)

An ordained minister as president?

Does the fact that Mike Huckabee served as an ordained minister create a disadvantage to his election or presidency? Not if one knows Huckabee and history.

First, many may not realize there was an active clergy (Presbyterian minister John Witherspoon) among the signers of the Declaration of Independence – and that two others had been previously ministers. Others were sons of clergy. Virtually all were Protestant Christians.
Signers of the Constitution even included Abraham Baldwin, a minister. "Williamson, Madison, and possibly others, had studied in this field but had never been ordained." And again, most signers of the Constitution were also Protestant Christians, except two, Carroll and Fitzsimons, who were Roman Catholics.

Being honored to share this bi-vocational duty as minister and politician with some of those early patriots, Huckabee has advanced and fine tuned his people and oratory skills. And most of all, it has taught him to put others first. Isn't that what we want in a leader?

Mike is a compassionate Christian conservative. Though solid in his faith and standing for traditional family values, he's not an uncaring extremist. He lives what he believes, and respects others' beliefs even when they disagree with him, committed to a republic that was founded upon the free exercise of religion.

In all respects, Huckabee meets our Founders' recommendations for president.

The David among them

The one question that remains is: Can Huckabee win the nomination? The presidency?
As with the other candidates, Huckabee has, and will continue to have, his hecklers: "He hasn't raised enough money." "He'll never beat Hillary." "Our society is too prejudice and paranoid to vote for a once Baptist minister." "He'll never out-race the top four Republican candidates."
I was thinking about these types of comments the other day when I recalled another leader in ancient times that didn't match up in the line up: King David. Seven men were poised and paraded for the position of king, but David was left in the field shepherding because he wasn't "a frontrunner in the polls." They overlooked the best because they were too busy judging by outward appearance. But God appointed David king.

It's time to quit choosing our leaders based solely upon charisma or one strong suite, and move back to being a culture which esteems and elects its leaders because of character and qualifications. It's substance, not pizzazz, we should want in a leader. Mike Huckabee is the real deal.

Huckabee in '08!

Friends, it's time for people to get off the bench and onto the playing field. If we are going to see a man like Mike Huckabee elected, it's time to rally behind him, support him financially, pray for him daily and spread the word of his character, platform and experience.

So can a man who was raised in a poor background from Hope, Ark., become governor then president? As Mike says, "Our country has already proven that!" What I would ask is: Give Hope another chance! This time, they want to send in the real cavalry.

Keep Hope alive! Join my wife Gena and me by electing Mike Huckabee in '08!

Republican Debate Tonight- Fox News 7pm Central

2007-10-21T12:44:00.000-05:00

If you have not had the pleasure of hearing Mike Huckabee debate then please tune in tonight. Huckbaee is in a league of his own when it comes to debates. Every time we have a televised debate his polling numbers have increased. Its important for Huckbaee to take the monentum for the Value voters summit and continue that tonight.

WASHINGTON — The eight Republican presidential candidates followed performances at the Values Voter Summit by hunkering down in Miami preparing for a FOX News Channel debate Sunday night.

Rudy Giuliani tried to find peace with a restless bloc of the Republican Party Saturday, telling religious conservatives not to fear him for his stand on issues such as abortion or expect he would change purely for political advantage.

The GOP presidential candidate won praise for simply showing up before an audience that has been casting about for the best social conservative in the Republican field. But two former governors, Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, shared the limelight with the former New York mayor, handily winning the top two spots in a straw poll of "values voters" conducted by the conservative Family Research Council.

Giuliani sought common ground with Christian conservatives by casting himself as an imperfect man who has asked for guidance through prayer. He recalled crossing himself during his first day of law school after 16 years of attending Catholic schools.

He offered assurances that despite his support for abortion rights, he would seek to lower the number of abortions. He pledged that if elected, he would appoint conservative judges, support school choice and insist on victory in Iraq — all issues important to the audience at the Values Voter Summit.

RelatedStories
What Would You Ask the GOP Presidential Candidates? The straw poll, conducted online and at the conference, placed Giuliani in eighth place, second to last. The top vote-getter was Romney, who unlike Giuliani, worked actively to encourage supporters to vote for him. Huckabee was close behind, but won overwhelmingly among voters who cast the ballots onsite at the event.

In a 40-minute speech that drew respectful applause, Giuliani invoked, as he often does, Ronald Reagan's admonition that "my 80 percent friend is not my 20 percent enemy."

"My belief in God and reliance on his guidance is at the core of who I am, I can assure you of that," Giuliani said. "But isn't it better for me to tell you what I believe rather than change my positions to fit the prevailing wind?"

It was among his better received lines.

"He won simply by coming," said Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, which sponsored the three-day conference. "He helped himself; he certainly didn't lose any ground."

But his reception was in stark contrast to the ovations for Huckabee, a one-time Baptist preacher who is a sentimental favorite of many religious conservatives.

Huckabee mixed humor, biblical references and the rhythms of a man used to the pulpit as he implored the crowd to put values above politics and not make expedient decisions.

He called for a constitutional amendment declaring marriage to be between a man and a woman and decried the "holocaust of liberalized abortion."

"We do not have the right to move the standards of God to meet cultural norms. We need to move the cultural norms to meet God's standards," he said, bringing the crowd to its feet.

Their GOP rivals, in speeches Friday, courted the conservative religious voters, who have a tradition of influence in elections.

In the straw poll Romney came in first with 1,595 votes, followed closely by Huckabee with 1,565. Significantly, however, Huckabee won more than half of the 953 voters who voted at the conference; Romney received 99 votes among conference attendees.

People who paid a nominal $1 fee to join the council were eligible to vote in the online poll, which began in August.

Romney has been assiduously courting social conservatives, trying to erase doubts over his Mormon faith and his past support of abortion rights.

For Giuliani, his speech was an important milestone in his search for the Republican presidential nomination. Giuliani supports abortion rights and has moderate views on immigration and gay rights.

"People of good conscience reach different conclusions about whether abortions should be legal in certain circumstances," Giuliani said while vowing to increase adoptions.

"We may not always agree," he said. "I don't always agree with myself. But I will give you reason to trust me."

Giuliani did not mention the subject of gay marriage in his remarks. Gary Bauer, a Christian activist and former presidential candidate, said Giuliani should have addressed the issue. But, he added, Giuliani helped himself by offering assurances on other fronts.

Late last month, a group of social conservatives meeting in Salt Lake City agreed to vote for a minor-party candidate if both the Democratic and Republican nominees back abortion rights. There also was talk of launching a third party, but no consensus emerged.

Bauer said Saturday that creating a third party would be the equivalent of "political suicide." Those still interested in a third party met privately again Saturday in Washington, but the gathering was sparsely attended, according to two people with knowledge of the meeting.

Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, speaking Saturday night at a dinner in his honor, said he too believes starting a third party would fail. He pledged to vote for a minor-party candidate if both Democrats and Republicans nominate a candidate who supports abortion rights.

While Dobson said it was too early to talk about choosing "the lesser of two evils" — he didn't mention Giuliani or any candidate by name — he made clear he would not make that choice.

"The only problem with that is it when you choose the lesser of two evils, you've still chosen evil," he said. "And that leads to compromise, and I tell you, I can't do that."

Huckabee Wins FRC Straw Poll in a Landslide

2007-10-20T22:34:00.000-05:00

This might not be what all of the media is reporting, but it is the truth. The onsite polling from the people that were actually there at the Value Voters Summit showed that Huckabee won the Straw Poll with 51% of the vote. In second place was Romney with only 10% of the vote. Huckabee won the onsite vote by a 5 to 1 margin and yet the media is focusing on Romney winning the straw poll. WE people actually hear Gov. Huckabee speak it is not even a close contest they become Huckabee supporters. Those people have spoken Huckabee is the Clear choice for value voters.

FRC Straw Poll
By Mike Allen
October 20, 2007

A tale of two straw polls
It could be an episode of Paul Harvey’s “The Rest of the Story.” Mitt Romney was announced from the podium Saturday afternoon as the winner of the Family Research Council’s “Values Voter Straw Poll,” narrowly edging Mike Huckabee.

But it turns out that the 5,775-vote total included thousands of people who had voted online, and could have become eligible by paying as little as $1 to join FRC Action, the legislative action arm of Family Research Council.

Although the audience at the Washington Hilton was not told, the crowd favorite among the 952 attendees who voted in person turned out to be Huckabee by a mile. He got 51 percent of the in-person votes, compared to just 10 percent for Mitt Romney.

This led one rival to suggest the headline, “Romney Win$ Straw Poll.”

The in-person figures were provided later at a news conference, and online at FRCAction.org.

The two groups agreed on one thing: Hillary Clinton was voted “least acceptable” candidate both overall (4,141 votes, or 72 percent) and in on-site voting (733 votes, or 77 percent). In total voting, Giuliani was the runner-up as least-acceptable, ahead of all the Democrats on the ballot. On-site, that honor went to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.)

Asked about the disparity in the two totals, FRC President Tony Perkins said his group had put out all the figures, and news organizations were free to report and interpret it as they wished, including “as two distinct polls.” He said FRC has stuck to the rules of the straw poll as it had been described from the beginning, and could not stop candidates from influencing the results.

Perkins said: “There’s going to be some natural disparity because when people hear someone, they’re going to be motivated. There’s no question in my mind, Governor Huckabee gave the best speech at this event. I mean, that was a clear motivational factor.”

Here are the total results:

Mitt Romney – 1,595 votes -- 27.62%
Mike Huckabee – 1,565 votes -- 27.15%
Ron Paul -- 865 votes -- 14.98%
Fred Thompson -- 564 votes -- 9.77%
Undecided -- 329 votes -- 5.70%
Sam Brownback – 297 votes -- 5.14%
Duncan Hunter -- 140 votes -- 2.42%
Tom Tancredo -- 133 votes -- 2.30%
Rudy Giuliani -- 107 votes 1.85%
John McCain -- 81 votes -- 1.40%

And here are the on-site results:

Mike Huckabee -- 488 votes -- 51.26%
Mitt Romney -- 99 votes -- 10.40%
Fred Thompson -- 77 votes -- 8.09%
Tom Tancredo -- 65 votes -- 6.83%%
Rudy Giuliani -- 60 votes -- 6.30%
Duncan Hunter -- 54 votes -- 5.67%
John McCain -- 30 votes -- 3.15%
Sam Brownback -- 26 votes -- 2.73%
Ron Paul -- 25 votes -- 2.63%
Undecided -- 11 votes -- 1.16%

Highlights of the FRC Speech

2007-10-20T22:27:00.000-05:00

October 20, 2007 - 12:34 PM
FRC Action Crowd ♥'s Mike

Mike Huckabee is coming. The Arkansas folks in the crowd go nuts. They won't stop cheering.

It's abundantly apparent from the corridors to the reception he gets when he comes in that Huckabee is among his own, more so than Romney or Fred.

He starts with an Al Gore joke. Then he talks about baby boomers now entering the system and what's going to happen when the hippies realize they can now get free drugs.

"I come as one not who comes to you, but as one who comes from you. You are my roots," he says as he sinks in to his speech. He points out that he started out as a Baptist minister. He tells a joke about a lady asking if he was one of those Baptists who was so narrow minded he thought only the Baptists would go to heaven. He says, "Lady, I'm more narrow minded than that. I don't think even all the Baptists are going to heaven."

Now he transcends into "non-negotiable values." Freedom. Family. Faith.

He says we cannot "negotiate, accommodate, or placate Islamic terrorists. We must eliminate." The crowd likes that. "We cannot have the naive idea that if we leave them alone they will leave us alone. That will get us killed," he says as the crowd roars.

Then he goes into immigration and the broken border. He says he thanks God that we live in a place where people want to break into than break out of, but how terrible it is that it is more difficult for us to get on an airplane in our hometown than it is for an illegal to get over the border. Biggest Applause of Any Speech Yet That I've Seen.

He says he doesn't blame those who want to come here. He blames the government that has sat around doing nothing for over 20 years. Again, the crowd goes nuts.

He moves to energy and how bad it is that we are so dependent on energy from others. People in the crowd verbally agree with him. Then he bashes China and the crowd goes wild. Romney should be nervous. So should Fred.

"Our freedom is threatened by a tax system that is out of control." "As we say in the south, not even duct tape and WD-40 can fix it." He goes into Fair Tax. He points out how it would stop the IRS from muzzling ministers in the pulpits from speaking out. The crowd goes wild again.

He brings up the Law of the Sea Treaty. The people clap. He says any judge that thinks he can legislate from the bench "ought to be impeached." My ears are ringing the crowd is so loud.
Thompson and Romney should be worried. We have reached the crowd favorite.

Now he goes into marriage. The crowd goes wild and these, by the way, are not his people. His small group is up front, but the rest of the crowd is not his, but they are now.

"Why are we importing so many to do our work? Because we've aborted over a million Americans." He calls it a holocaust. The crowd gets loud, but not as loud as at other points.
"We don't need to move God to meet the cultural norms. We need to move the cultural norms to meet God." Massive applause. Standing ovation.

Now he's moved on to how faith is threatened in this country. He says there was once a time when some things were negotiable, but the sanctity of life and marriage and our freedom was not and never should be negotiable. "Let us never sacrifice our principles for anybody's politics," he says. The crowd likes that line.

"You know the prophets of old spoke the truth boldly," he says. "They spoke the truth to power. All of you in this room have the power to go back to your states and counties and be true to your faith and convictions."

Now he transitions into sermon. He talks about Jesus (I don't remember Romney talking about the J man). He talks about believing in a God who could light a fire on wood soaked in water. He talks about Jesus raising Lazarus. "I don't ever want anyone to let us replace expediency as new values for our long held values." Someone shouts "Come on Mike!" He crowd starts yelling. They stand. They clap. They cheer. They whistle.

"I do not spell G-O-D, G-O-P. Our party may be important. But our principles are more important." He says we cannot compromise our core beliefs. He says "Ladies and Gentlemen, it is time for those of us who call ourselves value voters to pledge our lifes, our fortunes, our sacred honor to that which is right, and true, and eternal."

And then he's gone.

Important: Join the Huckabee Forums

2007-10-19T23:03:00.001-05:00

A big hat tip to I heart Huckabee for setting this up so we could all have a place to work together to support Gov. Huckabee.

The grassroots effort to elect Mike Huckabee as President of the United States got a huge boost tonight with the creation of the Huckabee Forums — online central for Huckabee supporters to meet, talk, strategize, and work together.All of you need to go and register. It only takes a minute and you'll be ready to go. This will really increase the effectiveness of blogging efforts, Meetup groups, and grassroots support nation-wide, but it requires that people get plugged in. So don't delay!

Forum.HucksArmy.com

Huck-a-Mania Running Wild

2007-10-18T22:23:00.000-05:00

Can Huckabee set conservative hearts aflutter?

by Dean Barnett 10/18/2007 4:22:00 PM .

THE ONLY POLLSTER that really matters is Scott Rasmussen of Rasmussen Reports. In addition to his unrivaled track record, Rasmussen is also the only pollster who is currently screening for likely voters. So when Rasmussen says something, we ought to pay attention.

Yesterday, Rasmussen released a poll of the Iowa Republican Caucus. Given its surprising results, I'm surprised it hasn't received more attention. Romney's winning with 25 percent; no big shakes there. Fred's in second at 19 percent; again, nothing earth shattering. But here comes the bombshell: Mike Huckabee checks in at 18 percent, a stunningly strong third place showing and within shouting distance of the frontrunners.

A few weeks ago, I was guest-hosting for Hugh Hewitt on his eponymous radio show, and a caller stated that the Republican nominee would be Fred Thompson or Mike Huckabee. Reflexively, I shrieked, "Huckabee?!" I yelled it again: "Huckabee?!" But maybe the caller was on to something.

Obviously, Huckabee is making a move in Iowa. He has risen from the bottom tier. In fact, he's solidly in the top tier, at least in Iowa. He has a five point lead over Giuliani and a twelve point lead over McCain in the Ethanol State.

So let's play this out: If Mike Huckabee wins in Iowa, does he have a chance of going all the way? The governor has a few things working against him. Most notable are the facts that he has no money and even less name recognition. But let's say he wins Iowa. Will victory in the Land of Ethanol be enough to offset those deficiencies?

It's been said that winning Iowa will be worth $60 million in free media to the victor. When I first heard that, I remember thinking at the time what a stupid and unsupportable assertion that was. Why not $59 million or $61 million? Nevertheless, I pass it along to you to help make a point. Regardless of the precise monetary value of a Huckabee victory in Iowa, Mike Huckabee will become very famous very quickly if he wins there.

So then what happens? Well, first off, Huckabee will still have no money, so he'll have to live off his free media and will be unable to fend off the assaults that his rivals will surely launch. But more important, Republicans across America will get to know a new member of the top tier.

And they may well like what they see. Huckabee is the most natural campaigner in the bunch. Unlike one member of the top tier, there's no danger that he'll doze off in mid-sentence. Unlike other members of the top-tier, Huckabee's a social conservative's dream. You want someone rock-ribbed on the social issues? Huckabee's your guy. He doesn't even believe in evolution. His taxing and spending in Arkansas may not be every conservative's ideal, but Huckabee probably has fewer policy skeletons in his closet than anyone else in the field.

The Republican rank and file's disillusionment with the present top tier hasn't been any secret. They have long hungered for the proverbial "someone else" to make their right-wing dreams come true. Mike Huckabee has a real shot at becoming the "someone else" who finally sets conservative hearts aflutter.

Dean Barnett is a staff writer at THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

Brownback to withdraw from GOP race

2007-10-18T22:17:00.000-05:00

WASHINGTON - Republican Sen. Sam Brownback, the Kansas conservative who struggled to raise money and gain recognition in the 2008 presidential campaign, will drop out on Friday, people close to him said Thursday.

Money was a main reason for his decision, said one person close to Brownback who requested anonymity because the candidate had not yet announced his plans. Brownback is expected to announce his withdrawal in Topeka, Kan.

It's widely anticipated Brownback will run for Kansas governor in 2010, when his term — his second — expires. He had promised in his first Senate campaign to serve no more than two terms.

"He also mentioned he is really looking forward to spending more time in Kansas," the person said.

As recently as last week, Brownback indicated he would keep campaigning through Iowa's first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses in January, saying he would exit the race if he finished worse than fourth there.

But his fundraising has sagged. Reports released Monday showed that of the nine Republican candidates who filed reports, Brownback was seventh in fundraising from July through September and had a mere $94,000 cash on hand, less than any of his rivals. Brownback raised nearly $4 million overall and was eligible for $2 million in federal matching funds.

He spent a good chunk of his money on the Iowa straw poll, an early test of strength whose significance diminished after Arizona Sen. John McCain and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani decided not to compete. He finished third in the August contest behind former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

The straw poll gave a boost to Huckabee, said Chuck Hurley, an influential Iowa conservative who is friend and adviser to Brownback.

"Brownback's campaign didn't catch fire," Hurley said. "It's just the field is still so full, and the pool of voters he was most fishing from was almost perfectly split between him and Mike Huckabee."

Hurley said Brownback called him Thursday morning to say he was dropping out.
Nationally, Brownback had the support of 1 percent of Republicans in this month's Associated Press-Ipsos poll, after peaking at 3 percent in June.

Besides money, Brownback was hurt because he supports a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, an issue that angers conservatives who influence voting in Iowa and other states that are struggling to provide education, medical care and other services to an influx of immigrants in recent years.

People close to Brownback said it was unlikely he would endorse another candidate on Friday.
It's uncertain how much weight a Brownback endorsement would carry. While the anti-abortion senator is a favorite of religious conservatives, he failed to become their consensus candidate and ranks low in national polls and state surveys.

Still, a nod from Brownback could bolster the conservative credentials of a candidate such as McCain or Huckabee, the rivals who appear most likely to receive his support.

Brownback and McCain are close Senate comrades and have refrained from criticizing one another, instead assailing Romney.

While McCain has a voting record similar to Brownback's on cultural issues, McCain prompts skepticism on the right flank of the party because he isn't a high-profile crusader against abortion rights and gay marriage. Brownback's backing could signal to Christian conservatives that they can trust McCain.

Campaigning in Spartanburg, S.C., on Thursday, McCain said of Brownback, "I'll miss him in this debate. He's a voice for family. He's a voice for the pro-life movement and community in America."

Huckabee, a Southern Baptist preacher, is another favorite of religious conservatives. But like Brownback, he has struggled to rally that voting bloc around his candidacy. He, too, could benefit from Brownback's backing.

Huckabee, campaigning in Concord, N.H., said he hoped to win over Brownback's supporters.
"Sam and I agree on so many things, particularly on issues of the culture of our nation, the sanctity of life, the importance of family and marriage," Huckabee said. "I think that people who have supported Senator Brownback and have done it faithfully will be very comfortable and at home supporting me, and I certainly welcome them."

Giuliani said he liked and respected Brownback, and he praised the Kansas lawmaker for his contribution to the Republican presidential debates.

"You know I'm an optimist, so I think I can win over some of his supporters," said Giuliani, who angers some conservatives because of his support for abortion and gay rights and gun control.
It's harder to imagine any other Republican in the field getting a Brownback nod, although former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson is a possibility. The Kansas senator has bitterly criticized Romney, and Giuliani is disliked by many religious conservatives because of his abortion rights and gay rights positions.

Republican Iowa Caucus Poll- Huckabee going up/Romney going down

2007-10-17T21:24:00.000-05:00

Iowa: Romney 25% Thompson 19% Huckabee 18%
Wednesday, October 17, 2007

The first Rasmussen Reports poll of the Iowa Republican Caucus for 2008 finds former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney enjoying a six-point lead while former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee are virtually tied for second.

Romney attracts 25% of the vote from Likely Caucus Participants, Thompson earns 19%, and Huckabee is at 18% in the poll. National frontrunner and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is the only other Republican in double digits at 13%. Arizona Senator John McCain, once considered by some to be the GOP frontrunner, gets just 6% of the vote. Kansas Senator Sam Brownback (3%), rounds out the field with Congressmen Tom Tancredo (2%), Ron Paul (2%), and Duncan Hunter (1%). Eleven percent (11%) are undecided (see crosstabs).
However, the race in Iowa is very fluid. For each of the top four candidates, between 57% and 61% of their supporters say they might change their mind before the caucus is held.
Romney and Thompson are essentially even among men, but Thompson attracts only 10% of the vote from women. In fact, Romney, Huckabee, and Giuliani all outpoll Thompson for the female vote.

Huckabee leads among Evangelical Christians while Romney leads among those with other religious beliefs.

Nationally, Giuliani leads the polls in the race for the Republican Presidential Nomination with Thompson in second. Thompson is seen as the most politically conservative candidate in the field. However, Romney leads not only in Iowa, but in New Hampshire, scene of the first Primary Election of the season.

Among those likely to take part in the Iowa Republican caucuses, Romney is viewed favorably by 76%, Thompson by 73%. Their unfavorable ratings are virtually identical and the lowest in the GOP field (22% for Romney, 23% for Thompson).

Huckabee is viewed favorably by 64% and unfavorably by 30%. Giuliani gets positive reviews from 68% and negative reviews from 30%.

For McCain, the numbers are dismal. Among Republicans likely to participate in the caucus, 53% have a favorable opinion of the Arizona Senator while 45% have an unfavorable view.
Seventy-five percent (75%) of the likely Republican Caucus Participants say that President Bush is doing a good or an excellent job. Seventy-seven percent (77%) believe that U.S. troops should remain in Iraq until the mission is complete. Nationally, 64% of Americans want the troops out of Iraq within a year.

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Likely Republican Caucus Participants believe the Republicans will win the White House in 2008. Twenty-five percent (25%) believe the Democrats will win and 24% are not sure. Democrats are far more confident that their team will win in November 2008.
All polling for caucus events presents challenges in determining who is likely to show up and participate. In conducting and analyzing this survey, Rasmussen Reports reviewed results for many possible levels of turnout. While the results varied modestly depending upon the turnout model, the overall dynamic was the same in all cases—Romney in the lead with Thompson and Huckabee close to each other in second. For example, our overall sample shows Romney with 25% of the vote and a six point lead. When only those who were absolutely certain they would vote, Romney attracts 24% support and leads by two.