How's the Republican party doing?Who's the best of their candidates, on present showing? What's all this stuff about who is the truest Republican: what's the test supposed to be? That you are for 'family values', against immigration, pro everyone having a gun but against anyone having an abortion and have never changed your mind on anything in your whole life? I couldn't work it out from the early debate but that seemed the gist of it (particularly the last)
In the Florida debate, and beforehand, I thought Huckabee was head and shoulders above the others. How's he doing in the polls? (All right,not thinking of his views on abortion etc, but as a candidate who presents well,seems presidential, answers sensibly and doesn't patently indulge in childish personal level attacks like 'You did that' 'No I didn't!Anyhow you did worse' 'No I didn't but he...' he came across well)
Hard to believe it'll be anyone but Rudy when the votes are taken. He "owns" 9/11, as many pundits have said; despite the fact that his preparations before then were, essentially, malfeasance. He says he understands terrorism because they bombed his city. In fact, he'll be like bush, only more so: belief in executive authority above the law, monochromatic foreign policy. But he's very good in public, and people will be snowed. If it's he and Hillary, I'm predicting he'll pull it off.
Posts: 1505 | Location: Puget Sound, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Well, Huckabee may be underfunded,so it may not matter
Must say that American politics at this level is interesting to watch. You really do have a different country, and by 'different' I do mean different. Neither better nor worse, just different to the extent of being unrecognisable in British terms. The tactics of politicians are the same the world over but the issues there are so strange to us, as is the need to address groups who would not be worth a second of the campaign time of our politicians (i.e would have no clout either within the party itself or nationally).Thinking to proclaim your faith or reveal it at all, or talking of being pro-life are two obvious instances of what would never happen here, for no better reason than doing either would lose you the election .
'...Wallis faced a tough crowd. Values voters are an odd mixture of economic liberalism and moral conservatism. They are fans of capitalism, individual responsibility, small government and residual welfare. In order to shift the Christian agenda, one must at least engage in conversation. And he did try. His appeal for poverty relief solicited a response from Land that of course, these values voters were not "for poverty," the difference was only about methods of poverty relief.
But then Wallis went one step too far. He dared to propose that levels of affluence in Western democracy were causing global poverty, and even global warming. The pleasantries came to an abrupt end. The crowd went quiet at first and then, at the mention of global warming, they began to boo. Let's be clear, Jim Wallis could hardly be accused of being a dark green ecoterrorist. He had only gently connected the dots: that consumerism uses up finite resources and that energy consumption has led to climate change. But this was a crowd of believers in intelligent design, not science...'Turning the other cheek
Th article points out that the "values" (shibboleths?) of the values voters are to do with homosexuality and abortion, plus a range of predictable right-wing concerns. They seem to be unaware of Christ's reported disdain for money and the rich. It's possible they'd happily compromise their views and vote for Giuliani to counter any perceived threat (taxes, environmental protection) to their material lifestyle.
'...the political clout ritualistically ascribed to Mr. Perkins, James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Gary Bauer of American Values and their ilk is a sham.
These self-promoting values hacks don’t speak for the American mainstream. They don’t speak for the Republican Party. They no longer speak for many evangelical ministers and their flocks. The emperors of morality have in fact had no clothes for some time. Should Rudy Giuliani end up doing a victory dance at the Republican convention, it will be on their graves.
Part of their demise, of course, can be attributed to the pileup of personal hypocrisies that have always undone Elmer Gantrys in America...'www.nytimes.com
Originally posted by newnickname: Another Huckabee fan, although a little reluctant.
Very interesting and 'me too'.That's exactly what prompted my comment from 3,000 plus miles and a world away from American politics.The candidate presents so well, compared to the others. Regardless of his alien (to us) beliefs, far too "Victorian" if not plain weird, to UK ears, he stands out.
Odd isn't it that some things are universal (or 'Anglo Saxon', as the French might have it)? Dangerous too: anyone might end up with the most honourable and competent candidate who, chosen, still insists on the most reactionary and damaging policies
By the way,one of The Guardian newspaper's correspondents has just described Giuliani as " [G W ]Bush with brains" . There you go: he frightens the respectable left in Britain, whatever he does to Democrats
As it stands right now, Mike Huckabee appears to be the front runner in Iowa. But after that I believe will be an up-hill battle. This race is still wide open. It could get interesting.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
While I have not taken a whole look at Mike Huckabee's platform, I do feel this is a step in the right direction. And there would definitely be a lot of debate about the Fair Tax. It definitely deserves a good look at.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
Don't you think that, if it were ever practical or economically sensible to impose a sales tax instead of income tax, there would be countries in the capitalist world, the US included, that would have done so by now?
Mind, if a man doesn't believe in evolution then he's likely to be simple minded, 'simplistic', about other subjects It's fundamental to his thinking that something simple and obvious must be the answer, the simpler the better.He doesn't pause to ask why, if it's that easy,he is about the only person to have thought of it or advocate it. This candidate will suggest an answer to the energy problem by proposing a perpetual motion machine next.
Income tax also looks like a simple idea on paper. Once the flat tax met with the real world, it would soon become as complex, inconsistent and loopholed.
(An example problem - new cars are a bad buy as it is, because of immediate depreciation as soon as the deal is signed. If, on top of that, you had to pay 30% tax on a new car, that you didn't have to pay on a car a year old, who would ever buy a car out of a showroom again? The flat tax would be the coup de grace for General Motors.)
Actually, it probably isn't a problem for Huckabee, in the primaries anyway, as his Republican rivals are all proposing something similar. Is it something the winner of the Republican primaries might quietly drop, once through to the Presidential elections?
A National sales tax would ultimately be the simplest tax system we could adopt. No more of everyone having to keep records & trying to interpet poorly written tax regulations. It would certainly make life a lot simpler for the everyday working people.
Another reason, I do not like the present income tax. It is an invasion of privacy. Every year we report our income to the government. Information that essently becomes public record. Bottm line is, it is absolutely NONE of the government business to know how much money each & every one of us makes. A National sales tax would eliminate this intrusion on our privacy.
Realistically speaking, while I feel the Fair Tax is a better & superior method for the government to collect its revenues, I do not see it becoming reality. Too many special interest groups will fight it. CPA's for example. And then there are more businesses popping up that will deal with the IRS, in helping people with tax problems.
But to bring up this idea in the Presidential campaign is a great idea & I hope it generates a lot of discussion.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
The so-called "Fair Tax" is anything but. A national sales tax means that the less you earn, the higher percentage of your earnings are for taxes. Spin it, slice it, dice it, but what it comes down to is exactly that.
With regard to what is and isn't the government's business, you need to read the US Constitution. According to it, the government has the legal right to tax our incomes. (Please don't bring in BS about it not being legal, no matter what your logic. The courts have ruled on this over and over. Ask Kent Hovind. But you may have to get on an approved mailing list. He was sentenced to ten years last January. That's not too bad, considering he faced a max of 288 years on the 58 counts he was found guilty of.)
If you want to change the Constitution, there are legal ways to do just that. Feel free to start. But don't expect to try to pass off a national sales tax as a fair tax without a few people pointing out the truth.
Posts: 17549 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
February 3, 1913 is the date when a fool & our money became partners. A.K.A. the 16th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified. So whether we as tax payers like it or not, it is reality, it is certainly legal.
Other than the 18th Amendment, this is no doubt the worst Amendment that was added to the Constitution. I maintain it is an invasion of our privacy. Do away with the income tax, install a National sales tax, would go a long way to eliminate that intrusion.
And the Fair Tax that Mike Huckabee proposes, yes it would be fair. Isn't it time for the poor to start paying too???
The government will get its revenue reguardless of how it's done. The Fair Tax is actually a simpler & better way to do it.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
"A National sales tax would ultimately be the simplest tax system we could adopt. No more of everyone having to keep records & trying to interpet poorly written tax regulations. It would certainly make life a lot simpler for the everyday working people." - LR
"...while I feel the Fair Tax is a better & superior method for the government to collect its revenues..." - LR
"The Fair Tax is actually a simpler & better way to do it." - LR
Huckabee and Fairtax.org call for a 23% tax on virtually all purchases in place of federal income taxes, as well as payroll taxes to fund Social Security and Medicare.
To ease the effect on the poor, they propose a "prebate" -- a monthly cash payment to every family -- to cover sales taxes on spending up to the federal poverty level.
Critics argue that this aspect of the plan would create an unwieldy new government program akin to welfare.
A report by the president's tax-reform panel said such a program could cost $600 billion a year -- "which would make it America's largest entitlement program," the report said.
Independent analyses have concluded that the tax would have to be far higher than 23% to maintain the government at current levels -- especially if Congress did not eliminate popular tax breaks, such as the mortgage-interest deduction.
William G. Gale, a tax expert at the centrist Brookings Institution think tank, estimates that the levy could run as high as 50% -- a tax so steep that it would be an invitation to mass tax evasion.
"It's a crackpot plan," said Bruce Bartlett, a conservative economist and former Treasury Department official who is a leading critic of the sales tax. "Anyone who supports it should not be taken seriously." - LA Times
LR it looks as if you are the person who needs to look at the issue a bit more closely. Either that, or you need to talk to the tax expert at the centrist Brookings Institution, the conservative economist and former Treasury Department official, the 2005 Presidential Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform, and the other credentialed experts who think the idea is lunacy. Share your insight with them. While you are at it, talk to the various members of the Republican majority in Congress from 1994-2006 and ask them why they didn't try to pass any flat tax legislation. Had they wanted to, it could have been easy. But they didn't. Do you know any reason why they didn't even raise the issue?
Posts: 17549 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
It's fundamental to his thinking that something simple and obvious must be the answer, the simpler the better.He doesn't pause to ask why, if it's that easy,he is about the only person to have thought of it or advocate it. This candidate will suggest an answer to the energy problem by proposing a perpetual motion machine next.
