Never Mind the Paulmania, Here's the Huckster!

Matt Welch | December 4, 2007

Mike Huckabee's sudden status as a statistically plausible GOP front-runner is as good an excuse as any to link to Ryan Sager's interesting "Crackpot Revolution" rejoinder to the contention (made by Nick Gillespie and I in the Washington Post) that Paulmania represents a "libertarian moment." Excerpt from Sager:

While I'd be delighted if the GOP were gripped by libertarianism - that is, a resurgent commitment to economic and social freedom - the truth is actually quite the opposite. [...]

[W]hile he claims to be for free trade in principle, Paul has earned the praise of Lou Dobbs for railing against America's involvement in NAFTA, CAFTA, the WTO and every other trade accord under the sun. In Wednesday night's debate, he could even be found endorsing conspiracy theories about a North American Union and one-world government.

In other words, the Ron Paul boomlet resembles that of the real surprise in the GOP race so far - the success of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who polls twice as high as Paul nationally (9 percent versus 4.5 percent). He's also pulled even with Mitt Romney in Iowa.

Huckabee is the opposite of a libertarian. As governor, he hiked taxes repeatedly and oversaw an explosion in state spending. He's explicitly running as a "different kind of Republican," positioning himself as the heir to President Bush's compassionate conservatism (a.k.a. big-government conservatism). His populist economic message includes expanding farm and alternative-energy subsidies and curbing free trade (to insulate us from the global economy). [...]

Big-government, big-religion, globophobic, populist conservatism - this is the message that's got real traction in the first Republican primary. Not Ron Paul's gold-standard nostalgia or support for medical marijuana.

Sager's reason archive here.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

|12.4.07 @ 12:51PM|#

Funny, but Huckabee's populism isn't going to do him any good. Because the only populism Republicans agree with is anti-immigration populism, and Huckabee has already failed that test in Arkansas.

x,y|12.4.07 @ 12:56PM|#

Don't Paul and Dobbs agree for different reasons?

Brian Defferding|12.4.07 @ 12:59PM|#

Huck's also failed the test on taxes and spending, and - most importantly - Iraq.

|12.4.07 @ 1:00PM|#

First the GOP base loved John. Then they found out more about him. Then they loved Rudy. Then they found out more about him. Then they loved Mitt. Then they found out more about him. Then they loved Fred. Then they found out more about him.

Now they love Huck. The only question is, "How long will that last?"

|12.4.07 @ 1:01PM|#

OK, since this is relevant to Huckabee, I figured I would post this.

Even worse for him is this snippet from the digg comments:

Nice try CurtisLow101 Now let the professionals handle this one.

Mike Huckabee:

Supports and will continue TORTURE of detainees.
At 8:30, Colmes asked Huckabee if he, as President, would use torture to extract intelligence about an imminent terrorist attack on America. In the process, he made the point that John McCain says that accurate information cannot be extracted by torture. Huckabee countered that point by claiming, "we have received good solid information from individuals from doing things of the nature you're describing"
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295883,00.html
http://progressivezone.blogspot.com/2007/09/govern ...

Says he is for lower taxes, but INCREASED state spending 65.3 percent (1996-2004) and supported five tax increases. Taxes were raised twenty-one times for an increase of $883 million dollars. Arkansas' general debt shot up by almost $1 billion.
http://www.nwanews.com/adg/national/203850/
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmNjMmI1ODhjN ...

Supports the War in Iraq, the troop surge and the continued operation of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Mike_Huckabee.htm

Opposes the medical use of marijuana, and said he would continue to RAID, ARREST, PROSECUTE, and IMPRISON patients who are using marijuana as a medicine.
http://granitestaters.com/candidates/mike_huckabee ...

Vowed to Sign a Nationwide SMOKING BAN in public places.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/08/hucka ...

Wants to give driver's licenses to illegal aliens.
http://arkjournal.com/2007/11/newsflash-mike-hucka ...

Grabbed national headlines with a governor's intervention that year to block the state from paying $419 for a retarded 15-year-old girl's abortion, her pregnancy stemming from being raped by her stepfather on a camping trip.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5244/is_19 ...

Huckabee secured the realease of a convicted rapist name Dumond who then raped and killed again. - http://www.arktimes.com/Articles/ArticleViewer.asp ...

Believes in Creationism.
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rncse_content/vol ...

Ordered the destruction of tapes and hard drives containing embarassing information. Early in Huckabee's term as governor, documents, e-mails and memos stored on hard drives just like the ones that were destroyed formed the basis of embarrassing stories about Huckabee, including a 1998 story in the Arkansas Times detailing how Huckabee and his family were using the $60,000-a-year Governor's Mansion fund as their personal piggy bank.
http://www.arktimes.com/Articles/ArticleViewer.asp ...

It's not suprising that he opposes Campaign Finance Reform:
http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1010& ...

Huckabee is against same-sex marriage and civil unions. He outlawed same-sex marriage in Arkansas.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Mike_Huckabee.htm

Huckabee seems to love loot and has a dismissive attitude toward ethics, campaign finance rules and propriety in general:

In the 1992 contest, Huckabee used campaign funds to pay himself as his own media consultant. Other payments went to the family babysitter.

In his successful 1994 run for lieutenant governor, he set up a nonprofit curtain known as Action America so he could give speeches for money without having to disclose the names of his benefactors. He failed to report that campaign travel payments were for the use of his own personal plane.

After he became governor in 1996, he raked in tens of thousands of dollars in gifts, including gifts from people he later appointed to prestigious state commissions.

He converted a governor's mansion operating account into a personal expense account, claiming public money for a doghouse, dry-cleaning bills, panty hose and meals at Taco Bell. He tried to claim $70,000 in furnishings provided by a wealthy cotton grower for the private part of the residence as his own, until he learned ethics rules prevented it. When a disgruntled former employee disclosed memos revealing all this, the Huckabee camp shut her up by repeatedly suggesting she might be vulnerable to prosecution for theft because she'd shared documents generated by the state's highest official.

Inauguration funds were used to buy clothing for his wife. He once took control of the state Republican Party's campaign account -- then swore the account had been somebody else's responsibility when it ran afoul of federal election laws.

He sped final action on a bill to allow video poker at the state's racetracks, an act followed not long afterward by a $10,000 campaign contribution from the owner of the state's biggest race track,.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/11/13/hu ...

Read More:
Political Positions - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_o ...
The dark side of Mike Huckabee - http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/11/13/hu ...

A Mike Huckabee presidency.
Nothing in the world, short of Hillary in the White House, wants to make me buy guns more.

|12.4.07 @ 1:03PM|#

Not to people under 30.

JL|12.4.07 @ 1:04PM|#

here's is huckabee's report card:

http://www.taxhikemike.org/

he gets an F as a conservative and a C+ as a liberal.

VM|12.4.07 @ 1:15PM|#

JL - that's pretty sucky. Failure as conservative, lousy as liberal.

Kinda like DUNDEROO - "F-" as libertarian "C" as authoritarian but "B+" as booty call for EDWEIRDOOO.

|12.4.07 @ 1:15PM|#

sage,

Damn, you type fast!

I\'m amazed|12.4.07 @ 1:21PM|#

that people seem to think the primaries are going to be decided by the candidates' policy stances. Huckabee is surging because he's folksy and likeable.

|12.4.07 @ 1:22PM|#

..."B+" as booty call for EDWEIRDOOO.

Mr. Moose, this brings up a chilling thought.

Offspring.

|12.4.07 @ 1:25PM|#

The "Huckster" rise in the corrupt and manipulated "polls" is propaganda at its worst. A close look at Huck reveals that he is nothing more than the same old despicable unprincipled politician. Don't fall for this media attempt to discourage the very real Ron Paul Revolution. The biggest worry we have is not weather we get the bodies out to vote but how to protect the integrity of our vote. The filmed ballot stuffing in the Saint Petersburg straw poll by Romney thugs is an example of the silence of the main stream press and the vigilance needed to protect election tampering. Remember, a free press is a fundamental tenant of freedom. The internet is the only venue that the despots can not control. Liberty is brewing!

Anonymous|12.4.07 @ 1:25PM|#

There are 2 types of people, and they are not liberals or conservatives.

The two types are those who want to be left alone while government does not waste money and the other type wants government to preserve all of their personal fetishes (evolution, marriage, social security, quaint small towns, etc.) at all costs.

The more accurate terms are libertarians and preservatives.

VM|12.4.07 @ 1:27PM|#

AH HA!

TheSolitaryWackJob is their love spawn?

SUDDENLY! It all makes sense...

|12.4.07 @ 1:29PM|#

"[W]hile he claims to be for free trade in principle, Paul has earned the praise of Lou Dobbs for railing against America's involvement in NAFTA, CAFTA, the WTO and every other trade accord under the sun."

Supporting these trade agreements does not equate supporting free trade, it just means you support the set of controls they have established in these accords.

Anonymous,
There are two types of people but they are:
Me
Fools

|12.4.07 @ 1:35PM|#

I don't see Huckabee's support as anything more than a media sponsored boost in the polls. Isn't it funny how the media started trumpeting Mike Huckabee and giving him softball questions like "What would Jesus do?". Last night they had a nice little piece with Anderson Cooper pissing abuot with the Huckster where we could see him fiddling about with a bass guitar with some youngsters. Yeah whatever! When I see the grass roots support and the campaign funds then maybe the Huckster will have some kind of a chance. Until then he's just a distraction and the media is doing a wonderful job at ignoring and distracting us from Ron Paul's message. If I see another story about the frickin Teddy Bear Teacher I'm throwing my TV out the window!

For a little historical context you should watch "The US vs John Lennon" on Google video to see how the establishment reacts to any peacenik like Lennon or Paul. It just goes to show that nothing has changed and yet I'm sure many establishment journos think they're more civilized and more enlightened the journos of the past.

Geotpf|12.4.07 @ 1:41PM|#

Elaine McKillop, Esq.-The polls aren't corrupt or manipulated. They are conducted by a wide variety of different organizations with different political views, and they tend to show the same thing no matter who is conducting them. Huckabee is a darling of the religious conservative side of the Republican party, and therefore has signficant, true, support of the voters in that camp. The other camp in the Republican party is the rich, pro-corporate side, which is similiar, but distinctly different, from Libertarianism.

Paul, in contrast, has the support of Libertarians, which amount to maybe 5% of the population or so. He will not win. He will place no higher than fourth in both Iowa and New Hampshire. Current polling shows him in sixth in Iowa, although he only trails McCain by a little bit and I believe Thompson will collapse by election day, but Rudy, Romney, and Huckabee will beat him. Current polling shows him in fourth in New Hampshire, beating Huckabee by a little bit and already besting Thompson, but McCain is stronger there than in Iowa, and Rudy and Romney stronger still.

TLB|12.4.07 @ 1:43PM|#

Sager might want to amend his comments: the NAFTASuperhighway has been confirmed by the ManitobaGovernment.

|12.4.07 @ 1:43PM|#

""""The two types are those who want to be left alone while government does not waste money and the other type wants government to preserve all of their personal fetishes (evolution, marriage, social security, quaint small towns, etc.) at all costs. """"

Type 1 wants government to preserve their right to be left alone.

|12.4.07 @ 1:45PM|#

""""Until then he's just a distraction and the media is doing a wonderful job at ignoring and distracting us from Ron Paul's message. If I see another story about the frickin Teddy Bear Teacher I'm throwing my TV out the window!""""

Huckabee is dating the Teddy Bear teacher, film at 11.

Sanger isn't a libertarian, he's a NeoCon. He spills the beans with the NAFTA WTO nonsense and Free Trade. Ryan, government managed trade like NAFTA isn't free trade. I suspect he knows it but is the latest from the NeoCon media to be called out to smear Ron Paul. Sanger is an Israel Firster.

And Reasonoids, one more time. Mass immigration with a welfare state just isn't feasible----Milton Friedman. Ludwig von Mises was against free immigration too. Between the hacks at the WSJ editorial page and the Reasonoids I can't decide who is loonier on the immigration issue.

|12.4.07 @ 1:49PM|#

Comparing Huckabee's support to Ron Paul's is a joke.

Huckabee is NOT that popular. Do you see people on the street waving Huckabee signs? Do you hear complaints of Huckabee spammers? Do you honestly believe Huckabee will raise even ONE THIRD what Ron Paul will raise in this 4th Quarter?

Huckabee's "rise" is contrived by those who support globalism and increased socialism, as well as the huge Evangelical population of Iowa. That's all it is. Once Iowa passes, it will be clear Huckabee is running to be a VP candidate.

|12.4.07 @ 1:50PM|#

"""""For a little historical context you should watch "The US vs John Lennon" on Google video to see how the establishment reacts to any peacenik like Lennon or Paul. It just goes to show that nothing has changed and yet I'm sure many establishment journos think they're more civilized and more enlightened the journos of the past""""

Or Dr. King.

What has changed is ability to electronically monitor just about everything, and what is how much of that is considered lawful.

|12.4.07 @ 2:06PM|#

...Paul has earned the praise of Lou Dobbs...

Once again, if dude A supports dude B, it doesn't mean dude B supports dude A.

This is like blaming Jodie Foster for the Reagan shooting...

|12.4.07 @ 2:17PM|#

Well, on the plus side, Huckabee is, at least, still holding on to some shred of sanity.

He was quoted on Iran as saying:

"While there can be no rational dealing with Al Qaeda, Iran is a nation state looking for regional power, it plays the normal power politics that we understand and can skillfully pursue, and we have substantive issues to negotiate with them."

I still wouldn't vote for him on economic issues, but if it came down to a Hillary/Huckabee contest, where we were damned to a bigger government either way, I might.

|12.4.07 @ 2:18PM|#

Dear gpotpf, you must also believe in the tooth fairy if you believe that the polls are not manipulated. How naive! As for where Ron Paul's vote comes from, you are misinformed. His support comes from every spectrum of the political landscape. There is no currant poll that can verify his true numbers. It is a cry for LIBERTY that is being heard around the World. This is only the beginning of the Revolution. Don't lecture me as though you are some kind of authority, I have no respect for unreasoned authority propagated by whores to the mainstream media monopoly. If you underestimate our strength, I'll see you in Boston, we'll have a cup of tea.

Geotpf|12.4.07 @ 2:43PM|#

Cameron-There are two types of support. There is weak but wide support, and strong but narrow support. That is, Huckabee has a lot of people who support him, but they support him fairly weakly. Paul has fewer people who support him, but they support him very loudly.

Thing is, weak but wide beats strong but narrow in pretty much any election, because people only get to vote once in real world elections. Now, imagine if the election required somebody to run for a mile before they could vote, but they could vote as many times as they wanted to, provided they ran an additional mile for each vote. The smaller number of Paul supporters would do marathons for him and he'd win. But that's not how the real world works.

javier|12.4.07 @ 2:45PM|#

"[W]hile he claims to be for free trade in principle, Paul has earned the praise of Lou Dobbs for railing against America's involvement in NAFTA, CAFTA, the WTO and every other trade accord under the sun."

Lou Dobbs is completely intellectually broke. He prasies Paul because he (lou) has a very shallow view of economics and doesn't understand they are coming from completely different views only to coincidentally coincide on a few policy objectives.

.|12.4.07 @ 3:09PM|#

"Thing is, weak but wide beats strong but narrow in pretty much any election, because people only get to vote once in real world elections. Now, imagine if the election required somebody to run for a mile before they could vote, but they could vote as many times as they wanted to, provided they ran an additional mile for each vote. The smaller number of Paul supporters would do marathons for him and he'd win. But that's not how the real world works."

And thank God it doesn't, because otherwise this country would go from batshit insane person to batshit insane person

|12.4.07 @ 3:54PM|#

Plenty of libertarians favor NAFTA, WTO, etc.

Negotiated reductions in trade restrictions are good because reducing trade barriers in other countries really is good for both Americans and the foreigners.

What most libertarians understand, is that if the foreigners refuse to lower their trade barriers, then both Americans and foreigners benefit from reducing U.S. barriers to trade anyway. This is the policy Paul supports without bothering to try to use these reductions in U.S. barriers as a bargaining chip to get the foreigners to reduce theirs too.

Further complicating matters, is that getting political support to reduce U.S. trade barriers may well require the support of exporters who will see direct and obvious benefits from reduced barriers in foreign countries. The quid-pro-quo may be needed to overcome the special interests that suffer costs from reducing US barriers to trade.

Few libertarians worry that NAFTA or the WTO are stalking horses for a world government that will replace the U.S. Constitution (which if it is read properly restricts government greatly) with some kind of new world constitution that allows broader government intervention (or perhaps mandates it.)

But as long as Ron Paul continues to say, I'm for free trade. I'm not an isolationist, I want to trade with other countries, etc., his opposition to specific trade agreements or regimes (W.T.O.) doesn't bother me.

|12.4.07 @ 3:55PM|#

Guiliani is a fiscal conservative?

What was it that he said about farm subsidies?

Well, it was mostly, "me too," with Romney's
complete sell out to special interests.

PC|12.4.07 @ 3:58PM|#

We saw this in the Ames straw poll, deny evolution and a good portion of Iowa supports you. Tancredo and Brownback both surged at the straw poll. All the young earthers are uniting behind Huckabee. This country is not as bright as some of you people think, regardless of your already low opinions.

|12.4.07 @ 4:25PM|#

This country is not as bright as some of you people think, regardless of your already low opinions.

You have no idea how low my opinions are reagarding the average American'c intelligence.

I charitably place it at the whale shit level.

|12.4.07 @ 4:26PM|#

See what I mean? I can't even proofread and I'm still smarter that Joe Sixpack.

GRS|12.4.07 @ 4:39PM|#

Last Thursday, I traveled to the St. Petersburg Presidential Debate and participated in the Florida Straw Poll. Do you know what I saw? I saw a city that was owned and ruled by Ron Paul supporters. We had planes in the sky, yachts in the harbor, and an army on the ground. I saw a celebration and enthusiasm for a candidate unlike that which I have seen in my life time. I'm not that young.

By comparison, the other campaigns presence was anemic or nonexistent. Romney supporters had to vote dozens of time each in order to give him his straw poll victory that day. I hope they got blisters from their repeated ballot stuffing. As for Mike Huckabee, I don't think I saw a single supporter of his the whole day.

Maybe they were hiding. I wouldn't blame them. Who would want to openly support a candidate with his record. Conservative firebrand got it right when she said ""He destroyed the conservative movement in Arkansas, and left the Republican Party a shambles".

Great! The Huckabee surge is all the conservative movement needs to seal the fate of calling Hillary Clinton "Madame President".

There is only one Republican who can distance himself from George W. Bush and the sad record of his presidency enough to win the coming battle with the Democrats, and that candidate is Dr. Ron Paul.

Viva La Revolution!

GRS|12.4.07 @ 4:44PM|#

The quote was by conservative firebrand Phyllis Schlafly.

|12.4.07 @ 4:49PM|#

I wonder if the elderly people who support Huckabee because of the Fair Tax have stopped to think about it at all.

They've worked all their lives and had their income taxed, working hard to save what the government didn't confiscate.

Now that they are retired with some money to spend, they will be taxed again when they spend it.

"Huckster" is a pretty good nickname, it appears.

|12.4.07 @ 4:56PM|#

Paul, in contrast, has the support of Libertarians, which amount to maybe 5% of the population or so.

It's more than just libertarians that support Ron Paul, but even at 5%, he could win the nomination. Turnout is very low, and there are a lot of candidates splitting the vote. If Ron Paul supporters are motivated enough and well organized, they could win the nomination for him just by getting that 5% out to the polls.

Certainly it would take an unprecedented level of turnout, but November 5th was unprecedented. And Ron Paul supporters are nothing if not extremely motivated and very well organized.

CFisher|12.4.07 @ 4:59PM|#

I think turnout will be the key. Right now, a lot of the GOP is pretty de-moralized and discouraged by their choices.

If a lot of potential voters stay home, Paul could do a lot better than expected simply because he has the most enthusiastic supporters.

Joel|12.4.07 @ 5:20PM|#

Wait...

Jodie Foster shot Reagan?

T|12.4.07 @ 5:32PM|#

This country is not as bright as some of you people think, regardless of your already low opinions.

You have no idea how low my opinions are reagarding the average American'c intelligence.

I charitably place it at the whale shit level.

Whale shit on average, which means half of them are dumber than that.

Eric Dondero|12.4.07 @ 5:34PM|#

Club for Growth just slammed Huckabee and Ron Paul for opposing School Choice. Showered Giuliani with praise for challenging the Teacher's Unions.

|12.4.07 @ 5:37PM|#

Whale shit on average, which means half of them are dumber than that.

For an example, see the post after yours.

|12.4.07 @ 5:56PM|#

Club for Growth just slammed Huckabee and Ron Paul for opposing School Choice.

Guess the Club for Growth just doesn't understand that education is not one of the Federal Government's enumerated responsibilities then.

Of course there's a lot of things the Club for Growth doesn't seem to understand.

Like the fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate for School Choice. He's the only one that wants the fedgov's nose out of the schools. What could be choicer than that?

Geotpf|12.4.07 @ 6:06PM|#

People keep trying to say I'm wrong on Paul's support. I'm not.

Go here:

http://pollster.com/

Paul places no higher than fourth in any state charted. Nationwide, he's sixth.

And if you try to argue that all of the polls are wrong, you are an idiot who does not belong to the reality based community.

|12.4.07 @ 6:25PM|#

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: democracy just doesn't work.

|12.4.07 @ 8:25PM|#

Fools And Their Rights Are Soon Parted.

The Chance to reduce government does not come along often. Only those who can not think beyond the moment and who let emotion drive their decisions will vote for someone other than Ron Paul.

Socialism Sucks !!!

I Vote For Virtue, I Vote For Ron Paul.

Godwhacker|12.4.07 @ 8:38PM|#

@Geotpf,
so anyone who doesn't agree with you is an idiot? Wow, some powerful analytical skills you have there. Paul has won over 50% of the straw polls and is now leading the race in fundraising. How do your mainstream polls account for that?

And what goes into making one of these all powerful mainstream polls? Check the fine print people! A poll of 600 people in states with millions of voters is STATISTICALLY IRRELEVANT. Add to the statistical insignificance the fact that these polls are bought and paid for by those with a vested interest in the out come, and what you have isn't worth the paper they are printed on.

Ron Paul's support has already baffled the professional prognosticators. Why? Could it be because the message of peace, freedom and prosperity has resonance in the American psyche that goes far deeper than the fascist in control of this nation would want us to believe?

Get with the program America! Ron Paul is the last exit before we slide further into despair, collapse, and tyranny. I'm getting off the train here. Ron Paul in 2008!

xtrabiggg|12.4.07 @ 11:50PM|#

Huckabee's support is a mile wide and an inch deep. these polls of 'likely Republican Voters' are skewed by using as a base those who voted in the last presidential primary- mostly hard-core Bush supporters, since he ran unopposed. If a poll asked those who were REALLY planning to vote in the primary (Or Caucuses, in Iowa), and sampled a TRUE cross section by age, gender and included cell-phone users, Ron Paul's deep and ferverent support would be more properly represented.

It's strange how the 'national polls' only show single digit support for the Good Doctor, but his campaign appearances far outdraw his competitors (sometimes there are more Ron Paul supporters at OTHER candidates appearances than that candidates OWN supporters!) It's also a more accurate indicator of support if you look ad INDIVIDUAL campaign contributors- not those 'bundled' and driven by professional fundraisers, PAC groups and lobbyists. Paul wins that measure hands-down.

If you look at PAID campaign workers, Romney and Giuliani would probably far outpace Ron Paul. But if you include VOLUNTEERS, no one in EITHER party can match Ron Paul's numbers. Caucuses and primaries are all about voter turnout, not support gauged on a phone call to grandma's house. When it comes time to call in the voters, who do you think will have the most dedicated supporters who will actually show up at the polls, no matter the Winter Weather or the distance travelled? Those who just switched their allegiance to the Huckster overnight, or those who deeply believe in their candidate and his platform?

Sir Rudy\'s KBE medal|12.5.07 @ 1:30AM|#

Typical bullshit invective on trade issues, only this time coming from an anti-Reasonoid. Why doesn't this dipshit substantively address the points Dr Paul raises about these international bureaucracies?

Because he can't because he is full of shit, that's why. The WTO and CAFTA the UN"s Codex Alimentarius *are* working to regulate the domestic pharmaceutical - vitamin & herbal supplement industries. It's a fact. Refer to the wealth of documentation at www.healthfreedomusa.org .

Ron Paul should have hit his opponents harder on these issues in the last debate. Huckabee went to kiss the ring of the CFR just a few weeks ago. Sir Rudy Giuliani is an attorney for CNTRA, a Spanish firm seeking to not only build but also buy existing roads in Texas and charge folks to drive on them. As, yes, part of the not-mythical "NAFTA superhighway" or whichever soibriquet you prefer.

The chief stockholder of CINTRA? .... The King of Spain.

Isn't that why we fought the American Revolution? To pay European monarchs to access our common-law rights-of-way?

Of course, this was published in the New York Post, owned by Sir Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp, which has its own "strategic alliance" with Sir Rudy...

Kolohe|12.5.07 @ 1:55AM|#

the NAFTASuperhighway has been confirmed by the ManitobaGovernment.

Again, please look at a map. There is a InterStateFreeWay (I-29) already there about 70 miles from Winnipeg.

But also, you pathetic hack, do you understand context, or deliberately ignore it? He was talking about possibly creating a navigable system between Lake Winnipeg and its various tributary rivers, and at its most ambitious, all the way to the Hudson Bay for an ocean exit. Or is this part of the plot to get around Long Beach longshoremen, by building a seaport in a remote, frequently ice bound area, where labor is about as expensive as it gets in North America.

Fuck Huckabee|12.5.07 @ 7:26AM|#

voting for Huckabee is voting for theocracy, war, and higher taxes. Huckabee may not be rising in the polls much longer, looks like while he was governor he convinced a parole board to free a rapist who went on to rape and kill a woman in Missouri. Huckabee is now saying he didn't talk to the parole board but that isn't what they say. I just saw one member of the board on TV saying Huckabee personally appealed to him to let the rapist go free.

Gene|12.5.07 @ 8:50AM|#

I know people like to call Ron Paul a tin foil hat waering lunatic for even mentioning a "NAFTA Superhighway", but shall we also call the provincial government of Alberta, Canada conspiracy nutballs when THEY recognize the superhighway as well?
http://www.infratrans.gov.ab.ca/INFTRA_Content/docType56/Production/pol306.htm

Eric Dondero|12.5.07 @ 9:41AM|#

Ron Paul's support. Go to the only real source that matters: Real Clear Politics.

Paul's running average for the last 3 weeks has been 4.7%.

What's most amazing, according to the trend lines, he's the most stable of any of the 6. Rudy's been down a bit. Huck way up. Fred way down. Mitt all over the place. McCain up slightly.

But Ron Paul stays right at 4.7%, neither up nor down for at least 3 weeks.

This suggests Paul has a very solid, unbending base of support. But it's not growing.

He probably realizes this. Thus, we see the South Carolina Ron Paul to Veterans campaign mailing debacle that was covered by Politco.com

VM|12.5.07 @ 10:14AM|#

Bawk Bawk.

|12.5.07 @ 12:07PM|#

Why, if the Huckster is great, are his campaign contributions so poor? Dr. Paul, on the other hand, is bringing in millions of dollars. He's already "smoked" John McCain's contributions. He has surpassed Guiliani, and has also surpassed Mitt Romney (if you subtract the loans billionaire Romney has given to himself). The interesting thing about the Ron Paul donations is that NOT ONE SINGLE DOLLAR came from big business lobbiests, where most all of the money the other candidates (including Democrats) came from big business. Gee, sounds like the others are bought and paid for by the few powerful interests they will represent (not the normal people this country has living and toiling here for). I just don't get why Dr. Paul is not in the headlines everyday. Ron Paul is for the heart and soul of this nation. He will limit government to the job it was created for. Namely, to protect the freedoms of liberty for ourselves and our posterity (I stole that line from an old antiquated document, the Constitution, known as the Law of the Land). Is Ron Paul RADICAL? Or has society grown RADICAL? Perhaps, we were just born into a system that had become RADICAL before we knew what had happened. Our founding fathers, upon creating our government, had just fought a war against tyrannical rulers. today, our government has surpassed King George of revoultionary times with the power to subjugate the people. Perhaps it is indeded time to turn back the clock to a more sane period of time. I am all for personal responsibility, sound monetary policy (no taxation without representation), a defense policy that defends America (not agressive, only defensive), true competition in the marketplace without the fedreal government making laws that choose favorites to succeed and hamper competition, and limited government (if you give the government no money, then there will be none for those lobbiests to gain for thier companies at the expense of competitors, and it will be a true system of free market where the company that can provide the best product or service for the best price will do the best, and we all win!) As a student (amature)of history, I believe that a return to sound and proven policies will bring this country back to tbeing the envy of the people of the world and enhance prosperity for ourselves and our posterity. As a side note, PLEASE do not call Ron Paul an ISOLATIONIST...he is a NON_INTERVENTIONIST, which means we talk and trade with all countries and NEVER get involved with the internal workings of any foriegn government. In such a case, we would be friends with all nations and enemies with none. Sounds pretty sane to me!

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements