Like Huckabee? Get out your wallet.

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

http://www.arkansasleader.com/2007/11/editorialswhos-biggest-tax-raiser.html

Ernie Dumas writes: Mike Huckabee raised more taxes in 10 years in office than Bill Clinton did in his 12 years.
Clinton tax increases

- Increased the general sales tax from 3 percent to 4 per- cent (Act 63 of special session of 1983)

- Increased sales tax by half of 1 percent and extended the tax to used vehicles (Act 3 of 1991)

- Increased the corporate income tax from 6 to 6.5 percent for corporations with net incomes greater than $100,000 (Act 1052 of 1991)

- Levied a 16 percent tax on snuff (yes, there are a few people who still dip snuff) (Act 628 of 1987)

- Levied a 25-cent tax on each pack of cigarette papers (yes, there are people who still roll their own) (Act 1045 of 1987)

- Increased the cigarette tax from 17.75 cents a pack to 21 cents a pack (Act 399 of 1983)

- Increased the cigarette tax by a penny a pack (Act 1211 of 1991)

- Levied a 2 percent tax on certain tourism items like admission to theme parks (Act 38 of 1989)

- Increased excise taxes on mixed drinks sold for on-premises consumption (not wine or beer) (Act 844 of 1983 and Act 908 of 1989)

- Increased motor fuel taxes by 1 cent a gallon (1979)

- Increased motor fuel taxes by 4 cents a gallon (Act 456 of 1985) (Clinton vetoed the bill but the legislature overrode his veto.)

- Increased the tax on motor fuels by 5 cents a gallon

- Increased motor vehicle registration fees, 1979 (subsequently repealed)
Huckabee tax increases

- Imposed an income tax surcharge of 3 percent on tax liabilities of individuals and domestic and foreign corporations (Act 38, 1st special session of 2003). (It was temporary until revenues improved. The legislature repealed it in 2005.)

- Increased the sales tax by 1/8 of one percent by initiated act (but it was a personal campaign by Huckabee, who campaigned across the state for it and took a celebrated bass boat trip for 4 days down the Arkansas River holding press conferences in each river city to urge passage of the act)

- Increased the sales tax by one-half of 1 percent (Act 1492 of 1999)

- Increased the sales tax by 7/8ths of 1 percent and expand the sales tax to many services previously exempt from the tax (Act 107, 2nd special session of 2003)

- Collected a 2 percent tax on chewing tobacco, cigars, package tobacco, cigarette papers and snuff (Act 434 of 1997)

- Levied an additional excise tax of 7 percent on tobacco (Act 38 of 1st special session of 2003)

- Increased the tax on cigarette and tobacco permits (Act 1337 of 1997)

- Increased the tax on cigarette and tobacco  cigarettes by $1.25 per thousand cigarettes and 2 percent of the manufacturers selling price on tobacco products (Act 434 of 1997)

- Increased the tax on cigarettes by 25 cents a pack (Act 38, 1st special session of 2003)

- Levied a 3 percent excise tax on all retail sales of beer (Act 1841 of 2001 and extended by Act 272 of 2003 and Act 2188 of 2005)

- Revived the 4 percent mixed drink tax of 1989 and added a 4 percent tax on private clubs (Act 1274 of 2005)

- Increased the tax on gasoline by 3 cents a gallon (Act 1028 of 1999)

- Increased the tax on diesel by 4 cents a gallon (Act 1028 of 1999) Note: Contrary to what Huckabee has said repeatedly in debates, speeches and TV shows, the 1999 gasoline and diesel taxes were not submitted to the voters and approved by 80 per cent of them. It was never submitted to a vote. It was the governors bill and it became law without a vote of the people. What the voters did approve in 1999 was a bond issue for interstate highway reconstruction but it did not involve a tax increase. Existing taxes and federal receipts were pledged to retire the bonds.

- Increased the drivers license by $6 a person, from $14 to $20 (Act 1500 of 2001)
So which raised taxes more? It is hard to quantify. If you measured the increases in the revenue stream, the Huckabee tax cuts far exceeded Clintons but that would be unfair because the economy had grown and the same penny of tax would produce far more under Huckabee.

But if you look at the major taxes, I see the aggregate Huckabee taxes as greater, especially if you deduct the 4 cent gasoline and diesel taxes that Clinton vetoed in 1985 and that the legislature enacted over his veto.

Anyway, the sales tax is the big revenue producer. Both raised it by 1.5 cents on the dollar and both expanded it to cover a myriad of services. Clinton raised motor fuel taxes a little more, Huckabee cigarette taxes a lot more.

A further note: Huckabee claims credit for a major tax cut in 1997, saying it was the first tax cut in Arkansas history (there had been many prior to that) and that he forced the Democratic legislature to curtail its impulse to always raise taxes.

The facts: The omnibus income tax cut bill of 1997 was proposed by Gov. Jim Guy Tucker in the spring of 1996. It had multiple (7) features, all aimed at relief for middle-class families or the elderly. He asked interim legislative committees to expand on his plan. Tucker then resigned before the legislature convened after his conviction on Whitewater-related charges, and Huckabee took office.

At the legislative session that followed, the Democratic caucus of the House (88 of the 100 members) made the Tucker tax cuts its chief program. The bill was introduced with 83 sponsors (all Democrats) and all Democrats voted for it. It was unopposed. Huckabees tax cut was to give each taxpayer a check for $25 each fall, saying it would help offset the burden of sales taxes on groceries (the repeal of which he repeatedly opposed). The legislature rejected Huckabees plan and passed the Tucker bill. Huckabee signed it into law.

The 94 tax cuts that he said he fathered are similarly misleading. The vast majority of those were the usual exemptions and modifications of various taxes and fees that the legislature enacts every time it meets. They were not a part of Huckabees program with a few exceptions. Rather, Democratic legislators sponsored them, usually at the behest of whatever special interest benefited, and Huckabee signed them when they hit his desk. If you did a similar summary of Clintons years he could claim probably well over 100 tax cuts. Every Arkansas governor since World War II could claim dozens each.

If you counted all the tax benefits extended to corporations under the incentives enacted by the legislature under Clinton  and they were part of his programs, especially in 1983, 1985 and 1989  the tax cuts would dwarf those under Huckabee.

[HankB]

Why vote for a Republican if he's going to govern like a Democrat? (This question doesn't just apply to Huckabee . . . )

What bothers me most about rising star Huckabee - despite the Chuck Norris endorsement - is that his history shows him as being far too eager to please illegal aliens . . .

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/us/politics/02huckabee.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

Huckabees Stature Rises, Mobilizing Tax Critics
By LESLIE WAYNE

As Mike Huckabee rises in the Republican presidential polls, fiscal conservatives have been raising alarms about a series of tax increases he oversaw while governor of Arkansas  new taxes on gasoline, nursing home beds and even pet groomers.

The Club for Growth, a politically influential antitax group, has dubbed Mr. Huckabee Tax Hike Mike and poured money into anti-Huckabee advertisements that were broadcast in early nominating states, with more on the way. Mr. Huckabee spends money like a drunken sailor, according to the groups news releases, and it has sprinkled YouTube and the airways with videos that mock him and his policies.

But the record offers a more complex and nuanced picture. While taxes did rise in the 10 years that Mr. Huckabee was governor, the portrayal of him as a wild-eyed spendthrift is hardly apt. For the most part, Mr. Huckabees tax initiatives had wide bipartisan support, with the small number of Republicans in the overwhelmingly Democratic state legislature voting for the tax increases and many maintaining that the state was better for them.

In addition, when Mr. Huckabee left office last January, he had turned a $200 million budget shortfall into an $844 million surplus. Still, as the attacks on his fiscal policies have stepped up, the Huckabee campaign has also cited examples of some 90 taxes that went down under his tenure.

But over all, on balance, tax increases outweighed the tax cuts by some $500 million, and many of the cuts that Mr. Huckabee heralds owe little to his efforts.

He got bipartisan support on all the tax increases, said State Senator Kim Hendren, a veteran Republican and member of the legislative budget committee. Huckabee didnt say I just want to raise taxes to start programs. He has a liberal heart for young people, for the disabled and for improving Arkansas lot in education, and he is pretty good at working across party lines.

Mr. Huckabees record on the tax front is emerging as a pivotal issue as he seeks to win the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses and other early nominating states. In Iowa, he has built his following around Christian conservatives, but the tax issue could resonate in states like New Hampshire, which holds its primary five days later and where Mr. Huckabee has been devoting more time.

The attacks on him over taxes come as he faces criticism on other aspects of his record as governor, including fighting for tuition breaks for the children of illegal immigrants.

The biggest increase under Mr. Huckabee was mandated by the Arkansas Supreme Court, which in 2002 ruled that the states school financing procedure was unconstitutional and ordered a more equitable plan  which led to $400 million in new taxes.

Some other taxes came about directly because of Mr. Huckabees efforts. After becoming governor in 1996, he traveled the length of the Arkansas River within the state to win support for an additional one-eighth-cent sales tax to improve the state parks system.

Early in his tenure, he pushed through a three-cent-a-gallon gasoline tax increase and a four-cent increase on diesel fuel, along with a bond issue, to improve a road system that was considered one of the worst in the country.

And when the state lacked enough of the necessary matching money for federal Medicaid payments to its nursing homes, Mr. Huckabee and the legislature enacted a $5.25-a-day bed tax on nursing homes, which won the grudging approval of the states nursing home industry.

All of this has become fodder for the Club for Growth and other antitax groups. At the Republican YouTube debate on Wednesday, an advertisement shown by a rival candidate, Fred D. Thompson, directly attacked Mr. Huckabees tax policies.

Weve been making noise about Huckabee since Day 1 of his candidacy, said Nachama Soloveichik, a spokeswoman for the Club for Growth, which analyzes the tax policies of Republican candidates. There is a groundswell among conservatives that this cannot be our guy.

Both Democratic and Republican politicians and political observers say the legislature had little choice but to raise taxes from 2002 to 2004 given the fiscal challenges facing Arkansas.

The biggest tax increases came in 2003 and 2004. A sagging economy had cut into revenues and the state faced a 2002 court order to equalize financing among school districts.

We had our backs against the wall; we had no choice, said State Senator Bobby Glover, a Democrat who has been in the legislature off and on since 1973. Our only other choice was to take more from prisons and heath care and other agencies.

In the end, the $400 million tax increase package was passed by an overwhelming majority, with Republican legislators taking the lead in pushing for it along with Democrats. The items included a sales tax increase of seven-eighths of a cent, the imposition of sales tax levies on several previously exempt services and some lesser taxes.

Republicans were fighting for the tax increase, said State Senator Denny Altes, the Republican minority leader of the State Senate who did not support the package. There were few votes against it. Some of the most conservative people, both Democrats and Republicans, supported it. It passed by 90 percent.

In general, Mr. Huckabee supported tax increases when he had a defined goal in mind, whether it was schools, roads or parks.

He tended to raise taxes for specific government programs, said Jay Barth, an associate political science professor at Hendrix College in Conway, Ark. He does believe in a robust government as an active force in the lives of its citizens, especially in helping the little guy.

The Club for Growth is circulating a video of Mr. Huckabee speaking to the legislature and going through a litany of all the taxes he could support, leaving the impression that there is no tax he would not embrace.

But the purpose of Mr. Huckabees address was specific: Arkansas was facing a multimillion-dollar budget shortfall and Mr. Huckabee was pleading for a tax increase to cover it  any tax, and listing all the possibilities.

The other big tax increase, which also received bipartisan support, was the one on gasoline to pay for road improvements.

Our roads were in terrible condition, said Dennis Milligan, chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party. We knew that in order to attract jobs and companies we needed better roads. Huckabee made a wise choice and now we have companies locating here and wonderful roads. He did a lot to improve roads, and you cant do it for free.

In the face of criticism from fiscally conservative Republicans, Mr. Huckabee has been spending more time talking about the taxes he cut than the ones he raised. For instance, at the Republican debate last week, he said that he had cut 90 taxes and that the sales tax was only a penny higher under his stewardship.

Of the 90 tax cuts cited by Mr. Huckabee, one was large: an increase in the standard deduction for income taxes. But most were very small, with some reducing state tax revenues by as little as $15,000 to $20,, according to an Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration study that was reported in The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

Still, the Huckabee campaign has set up a Truth Squad specifically intended to rebut the Club for Growth.

Antitax radicals will never be convinced that tax monies can be legitimately spent on highways, bridges, schools and Medicare, the campaign said in a response to the Club for Growth.

[Manedwolf]

I think the Republican lineup right now can be described as:

    Rudy Giulian  - Liar
    Mike Huckabee  - Liberal (on taxes and illegals)
    Duncan Hunter  - Lost
    John McCain    - Leaf on political winds, whichever way blowing
    Ron Paul      - Loon
    Mitt Romney  - Liar
    Tom Tancredo - Lost (unfortunately!)
    Fred Thompson  - Lazy

I'm depressed.

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

You're so right about Thompson.  The guy looked like he was half asleep on the debate.  He's not even trying.

[yesitsloaded]

Rudy Giulian  - Liar
    Mike Huckabee  - Liberal (on taxes and illegals)
    Duncan Hunter  - Lost
    John McCain    - Leaf on political winds, whichever way blowing
    Ron Paul      - Loon
    Mitt Romney  - Liar
    Tom Tancredo - Lost (unfortunately!)
    Fred Thompson  - Lazy

I think this is Maned's secret way of telling us he likes Ron Paul. He is the only one who isn't a flip flop, lair, or lost. His "loony" ideas are offset by the fact that being elected president doesn't make you god of the United States, and congress can still override a veto.

[Manedwolf]

Rudy Giulian  - Liar
    Mike Huckabee  - Liberal (on taxes and illegals)
    Duncan Hunter  - Lost
    John McCain    - Leaf on political winds, whichever way blowing
    Ron Paul      - Loon
    Mitt Romney  - Liar
    Tom Tancredo - Lost (unfortunately!)
    Fred Thompson  - Lazy

I think this is Maned's secret way of telling us he likes Ron Paul. He is the only one who isn't a flip flop, lair, or lost. His "loony" ideas are offset by the fact that being elected president doesn't make you god of the United States, and congress can still override a veto.

No, I think he's a naive idiot who would utterly ruin the economy, make the dollar look like the Peso to world investors, make our enemies laugh at us and then kill us. He needs an intervention and medication, not any sort of position of power over public policy in any way, shape or form. It'd be like giving the keys to a semi to someone who is hallucinating.

Don't put words in my mouth. The guy is the Republican equivalent of koo-koo Kucinich, and many of his followers are freakish cultists.

From the Nashua Telegraph just now:

I attended the Holiday Stroll on Saturday evening in Nashua along with my family. It was a nice time and we had a lot of fun.

However, I was extremely disappointed in the political flavor that was thrust upon those in attendance.

While we were enjoying some of the food at the event, my young children were startled and scared by a large mob of people moving quickly down the center of Main Street yelling and screaming.

It was a large group of Ron Paul supporters who were chanting while thrusting signs in the air. It appears as though they were attempting to overpower or "show up" the other candidates and their supporters also in attendance.

[Waitone]

Here is another view of Huckabee's work.  It is from Dick Morris of campaign guru fame.

MIKE HUCKABEE IS A FISCAL CONSERVATIVE

By DICK MORRIS

Published on TheHill.com on November 28, 2007.

As Mike Huckabee rises in the polls, an inevitable process of vetting him for conservative credentials is under way in which people who know nothing of Arkansas or of the circumstances of his governorship weigh in knowingly about his record. As his political consultant in the early 90s and one who has been following Arkansas politics for 30 years, let me clue you in: Mike Huckabee is a fiscal conservative.

A recent column by Bob Novak excoriated Huckabee for a 47 percent increase in state tax burden. But during Huckabees years in office, total state tax burden  all 50 states combined  rose by twice as much: 98 percent, increasing from $743 billion in 1993 to $1.47 trillion in 2005.

In Arkansas, the income tax when he took office was 1 percent for the poorest taxpayers and 7 percent for the richest, exactly where it stood when he left the statehouse 11 years later. But, in the interim, he doubled the standard deduction and the child care credit, repealed capital gains taxes for home sales, lowered the capital gains rate, expanded the homestead exemption and set up tax-free savings accounts for medical care and college tuition.

Most impressively, when he had to pass an income tax surcharge amid the drop in revenues after Sept. 11, 2001, he repealed it three years later when he didnt need it any longer.

He raised the sales tax one cent in 11 years and did that only after the courts ordered him to do so. (He also got voter approval for a one-eighth-of-one-cent hike for parks and recreation.)

He wants to repeal the income tax, abolish the IRS and institute a fair tax based on consumption, and opposes any tax increase for Social Security.

And he can win in Iowa.

When voters who have decided not to back Rudy Giuliani because of his social positions consider the contest between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, they will have no difficulty choosing between a real social conservative and an ersatz one.

Romney, who began as a pro-lifer and switched in order to win in Massachusetts, and then flipped back again, cannot compete with a lifelong pro-lifer, Huckabee.

But Huckabees strength is not just his orthodoxy on gay marriage, abortion, gun control and the usual litany. It is his opening of the religious right to a host of new issues. He speaks firmly for the right to life, but then notes that our responsibility for children does not end with childbirth. His answer to the rise of medical costs is novel and exciting. Eighty percent of all medical spending, he says, is for chronic diseases. So he urges an all-out attack on teen smoking and overeating and a push for exercise not as the policies of a big-government liberal but as the requisites of a fiscal conservative anxious to save tax money.

So what happens if Huckabee wins in Iowa? With New Hampshire only five days later, his momentum will be formidable. The key may boil down to how Hillary does in Iowa. Hillary? Yes. If she loses in Iowa, most of the independents in New Hampshire will flock to the Democratic primary to vote for her or against her. That will move the Republican electorate to the right in New Hampshire  bad news for Rudy, good news for Huckabee. But if she wins in Iowa, there will be no point in voting in the Democratic primary and a goodly number will enter the GOP contest, giving Rudy a big boost.

And afterward? If Romney wins Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan and South Carolina, sweeping the early primaries, Giuliani will have a very tough task to bring him down in Florida or on Super Tuesday. It can be done, but its tough. But if Romney loses in Iowa (likely to Huckabee) then Rudy can survive the loss of Iowa and even New Hampshire without surrendering irresistible momentum to Romney.

In any event, neither Hillary nor Giuliani will be knocked out by defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire. Their 50-state organizations, their national base and their massive war chests will permit them to fight it out all over the United States. Even if they lose the first two contests, they will remain in the race and could well come back to win.

I'm not carrying water for either Huckabee or Morris.  Matter of fact I still have Huckabee in the suspect category.  Here is a different interpretation of the same kind of data.

[Scott]

I think I'll stick with the loon. I'm tired of the same old, same old.

[K Frame]

OK, folks, we're going to try this again. This was a good thread that went bad.

This time, the subject WILL stay on topic, which is MIKE HUCKABEE'S political/fiscal background.

Not Ron Paul's political/fiscal background, or why he's the only logical choice as the next POTUS.

Not whether or not the United States brought 9-11 on itself.

And most assuredly none of the other crap that was going on in it.

That's the only warning you'll get.

[Len Budney]

I wonder whether this item from Huckabee's political background will harm his candidacy?

[Manedwolf]

A "Story" by Huffington Post? Oh, come on now. Consider the source bias there!

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

Doesn't really mean they are wrong.  If the documents they link to support their claims, who breaks the story is irrelevant.  But, you can look forward to Hannity and Rush saying exactly what you said.

[Len Budney]

Consider the source bias there!

Sure, the source bias is obvious. But the facts are checkable.

[K Frame]

If the documents are verifiable, then the source is really immaterial.

[camacho]

Why don't we hear the other side on this:

Truth Squad: Governor Huckabee's Repsponse to the Wayne Dumond Incident
December 05, 2007
This is the transcript from his answer at the press conference today on the Wayne Dumond Case. Governor Huckabee was asked if he had pressured the parole board to release Dumond.

Governor Huckabee: No. I did not. Let me categorically say that I did not. And it's really interesting, if people want to really look into that record. Here's the chronology, and here's the timeline. I'm going to try to do it as briefly as I can, because it's been delved into repeatedly, normally during an election year.

In 1992, Bill Clinton was governor; Jim Guy Tucker was Lieutenant Governor. And during Bill Clinton's governorship, while he was campaigning for president, Jim Guy Tucker signed the papers to commute the sentence of Wayne DuMond to parole eligibility. That's what made him parole eligible in 1992. He had been convicted of rape in Forest City Arkansas, during time of awaiting trial, he was hogtied and castrated; his testicles were later placed in a jar on the desk of a sherriff.

It was a brutal, amazingly, just, complicated case. There were all kinds of questions about the case. Many stories were written; I am sure you can Google all the way back to the 1980s and get more information than you even want on the case. For reasons Bill Clinton and Jim Guy Tucker would have to answer, not me, the sentence was commuted in 1992.

I was not elected to anything at that time; I was a candidate for the United States Senate. I was elected Lieutenant Governor in 1993; in 1996, Wayne DuMond had requested another commutation for time served because the parole board had not granted parole even though he was parole eligible.

Let me make it clear, governors in Arkansas cannot parole anybody. The parole process is separated from governor; the governor can commute a sentence to make it parole eligible. The actual parole is handled completely separate from the governor. Jim Guy Tucker had been convicted of Whitewater related felonies, he resigned. When I came into office in July, the file of Wayne DuMond was on my desk and was transferred to me having been sat there for several months prior to my coming of office.

That request for commutation to time served awaited me. I originally considered it, indicated even an intention I that might grant it. There was and incredible outcry over that, I ultimately requested to deny it. Primarily for the reason I believed there needed to be some supervision; I was not completely confident that it would be appropriate for him to get out without supervision. He had a unblemished prison record - an exemplary record in terms of getting along as an inmate. He had met all the qualifications for being paroled, including having a job lined up, a sponsor with a church I think in Houston, TX, originally.

I chose ultimately not to pardon him. I made a visit to the parole board early in my tenure as a governor at the request of chairman, because you gotta remember, every member of that parole board had been appointed by Jim Guy Tucker or Bill Clinton. Not one of them appointed by me. I'm a new Republican governor, they'd never seen one. I think they had real concern on how to interrelate or how to relate to me. And what kind of attitude I had in general to crime, attitude, parole, etc. So at their invitation, I went to the meeting; someone brought up this case.

Frankly, it was simply part of a broader discussion; I did not ask them to do anything. I did indicate it was sitting at my desk; and I was giving thought to it. But this was probably in, I'm thinking maybe September or October when that meeting was held; I can't remember exactly. The parole board, the following year, early 97 approved his parole plan after I had denied the further commutation.

Subsequent to that, he&I can't remember exactly the timing, he left there, went to MO, unfortunately was later convicted for the murder of one woman and awaiting trial for the murder of another when he died in prison.

It was a horrible situation, horrible, I feel awful about it in every way. I wish that there was some way I could go back and reverse the clock and put him back in prison. But nobody, not me, not Jim Guy Tucker, not Bill Clinton, not that parole board, could ever imagine what might have transpired.

For people to say that I was responsible in getting him out makes a few presumptions - number one, it presumes, I had an influence on Bill Clinton and Jim Guy Tucker in 1992. The second presumption, it assumes I had the amazing persuasive power to go into a board of seven people, all of them appointed by Democratic governors before me and persuade them to do something they didn't wish to do.

It also assumes that, not only did I have that power, but that only two of them changed story about what happened and they didn't do so until 6 years later when we were in the middle of an election year. And after, and subsequent to the fact that I had not reappointed them to their $75,000 jobs on the parole board.

Now if you can follow that line and believe that I am solely responsible, then you'll believe that. But you'll believe a lot of other things as well. I am deeply sorry, and I mean, awfully, just horrified of what happened to (inaudible). And there is not a single person that will ever bring those women back to their families. But that's the story, that's what happened.

And yes it will come up in the presidential campaign. It came up in my governor's campaign. There will be people who are victims who will probably be brought forth to make statements but, you know, I can't fix it. I can only tell the truth and let the truth be my judge.

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Newsroom.Article&ID=127

[Volt]

He is a supporter of the Fair Tax; therefore, I am a supporter of his.

The income tax, capital gains tax, and the various business income taxes, are of the 20th and not for the 21st century. It is a world economy now and our tax structure must be structured accordingly. Sales taxes tax everyone, foreign and domestic, legal and illegal, who do business in our country.  Income and corporate taxes tax specifically law abiding American citizens and encourage imports and discourage exports. Our current tax structure taxes and discourages American industry while not taxing foreign industry that imports into the country. Sales taxes make sense if you want to be competitive in the world economy. Income taxes do not.

Furthermore, Huckabee has fought and won against the powerful and ruthless Clinton Arkansas Machine on numerous occasions. This guy knows the Clinton Machine and has beaten the Clinton Machine. He knows their tricks and low ways. He can win.