Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Mike Huckabee vs. the Libertarians. Sorry, "Faux-Cons."
Once (and future?) presidential candidate Mike Huckabee is out
with his third book in as many years,
Do the Right Thing, a searing picture of a
day on a Brooklyn city block a memoir of his unlikely,
underfunded, and proudly socially conservative bid. A big chunk of
the book is dedicated to settling some scores between Huck and the
economic conservatives and libertarians who considered (and still
consider) him unacceptable.
The real threat to the Republican Party is something we saw a lot of this past election cycle: libertarianism masked as conservatism. And it threatens to not only split the Republican Party, but render it as irrelevant as the Whig Party.
Huckabee trains a lot of fire on the Club for Growth, who had another tough election cycle, with 2006 victors Rep. Tim Walberg (MI) and Rep. Bill Sali (ID) going down in the Obama wave, joined by prize recruit Andy Harris in Maryland's first district. (Harris beat incumbent Rep. Wayne Gilchrest, a fellow Republican, in the primary, and watched Gilchrest push past him to elect Democrat Frank Kratovil.) Perhaps the Club's biggest success was its pre-emptive demolition job on Huckabee. The governor responds by accusing them and other libertarians of believing in "purity of politics first; people are on their own." In a chapter titled "Let Them Buy Stocks!" he accuses "libertarian faux-cons" of driving "the party even further away from its base of the hard-working middle class." He names names.
You can see the growing influence of faux-cons in the 2008 election cycle from the so-called Ron Paul Revolution to the economics-only conservatism reflected by some of the supporters of Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani.
But he backs off on Paul.
Before I get singed by hot and angry mail from Ron Paul disciples, I want to be emphatic in stating my sincere respect for Congressman Paul. I was convinced that he at least had genuine convictions and was willing to stand by them and on them no matter what the audience--a lot more than I could say for some of the candidates who could change positions as easily as Cher can change costumes in one of her many farewell tours.
Subtext: "Go to hell, Mitt Romney. No, not the one you believe in. The one I believe in."
One reason Huckabee might be softer on Paul is the role that rEVOLutionaries played in Huckabee's West Virginia primary victory. West Virginia Republicans select their winner at a party member-only convention. As I reported on Feb. 5, Paul backers, who loathed the bullying and arrogant Romney faction, cut a deal with Huckabee backers to combine their votes and edge out Romney. All the news networks reported that John McCain supporters had made the deal, but Huckabee sets the record straight and credits the "horse-trading" of the Paul people for his win.
BDB|11.17.08 @ 11:36AM|#
There is a very good chance this Huckabee/Palin wing of the party will take control for the next four years.
|11.17.08 @ 11:37AM|#
The real threat to the Republican Party is something we saw
a lot of this past election cycle: libertarianism masked as
conservatism. And it threatens to not only split the Republican
Party, but render it as irrelevant as the Whig Party.
Say it loud! Conservatives are not libertarians. There is no
"libertarian wing" of the Republican party. Every libertarian that
has ever voted for a Republican is a FUCKING IDIOT! Republicans are
even worse than Democrats. The "libertarian wing" of the GOP ain't
nothing but bitches for their totalitarian overlords. FUCK THE GOP
and any fucking tool stupid enough to vote for them.
The Angry Optimist|11.17.08 @ 11:41AM|#
Gonna be one of those days, is it, Warren?
a lot more than I could say for some of the candidates who
could change positions as easily as Cher can change
costumes
Uh oh, me gaydar's buzzing...
|11.17.08 @ 11:45AM|#
The real threat to the Republican Party is something we saw
a lot of this past election cycle: libertarianism masked as
conservatism. And it threatens to not only split the Republican
Party, but render it as irrelevant as the Whig Party.
Huckabee. Keeping The Stupid In The Stupid Party.™
I find it slightly more than amusing how it's the libertarians'
fault for everything that *somebody else* screws up.
At least he didn't blame those filthy money changers for the GOSP's
problems.
economist|11.17.08 @ 11:47AM|#
"Every libertarian that has ever voted for a Republican is a
FUCKING IDIOT!"
HEY!
kinnath|11.17.08 @ 11:47AM|#
Huckabee is a hard-core populist (the anti-libertarian). I consider him one of the more dangerous candidates running last time around. I'd take Obama anyday over Huckabee.
|11.17.08 @ 11:50AM|#
lighten up, francis, er Warren.
the "libertarian wing" are those of us who'll throw a vote that way
for a candidate who is sufficiently in line with our principles...
the "idiots" are those who marginalize themselves into
irrelevancy... *cough cough* What good is your soap box if you
never get anything done?
Sonny Bunch|11.17.08 @ 11:53AM|#
Do you think it was some editor's idea of a joke to name the book after Lee's opus? I saw that the other day and literally laughed out loud. People were giving me funny looks in the office.
The Angry Optimist|11.17.08 @ 11:58AM|#
Every libertarian that has ever voted for a Republican is a
FUCKING IDIOT!
Every Republican everywhere, anytime?
Barry Goldwater?
BakedPenguin|11.17.08 @ 12:01PM|#
Conservatives are not libertarians. There is no "libertarian wing" of the Republican party. Every libertarian that has ever voted for a Republican is a FUCKING IDIOT!
Warren vs. Dondero II: Libertarian Boogaloo
|11.17.08 @ 12:05PM|#
TAO,
I'll qualify that with a "since 1964"
crazy jimbah | November 17, 2008, 11:50am | #
lighten up, francis, er Warren.
the "libertarian wing" are those of us who'll throw a vote that way
for a candidate who is sufficiently in line with our principles...
the "idiots" are those who marginalize themselves into
irrelevancy... *cough cough* What good is your soap box if you
never get anything done?
Better to be marginalized into irrelevancy than to be a whore to
scum. What good is your pragmatism if it only serves to perpetuate
evil? At least I'm not part of the problem.
|11.17.08 @ 12:07PM|#
"libertarianism masked as conservatism"
I don't think Huckabee understands what conservatism really is,
much less libertarianism. Huckabee's politics are deeply
anti-conservative and in many cases on the wrong side of emerging
shifts in public opinion. (e.g. gay marriage)
"Huckabee/Palin wing"
As an Alaskan I can tell you that Palin and Huckabee have less in
common than you might think. National media coverage didn't present
an accurate image of the real Palin.
I wouldn't put Palin and Huckabee in the same grouping... (Both are
highly problematic in their own special, disfunctional ways.)
|11.17.08 @ 12:08PM|#
Warren vs. Dondero II: Libertarian Boogaloo
Ha! I am so totally a Dondero nemesis. Think I should get a
cape?
BDB|11.17.08 @ 12:10PM|#
"I wouldn't put Palin and Huckabee in the same grouping... (Both
are highly problematic in their own special, disfunctional
ways.)"
What would you say is the key difference between them? They seemed
to attract similar types of followings (well, Palin added on men
who had a hard on for her and a few disgruntled PUMAs).
|11.17.08 @ 12:11PM|#
Ha! I am so totally a Dondero nemesis. Think I should get a
cape?
You need like a Skelator mask or something.
The Angry Optimist|11.17.08 @ 12:13PM|#
Epi - don't go bringing Calista Flockhart into the discussion.
|11.17.08 @ 12:15PM|#
I hate it when they say there are no libertarian democrats or libertarian republicans, that is UNTRUE! there are libertarian leaning people in all parties. Libertarianism is not just a party, but a beliefe and like most beliefs you are free to take what you wish from it, see christians et al for different interpertations of the same words. Libertarianism is an IDEAL first a party second, BTW i am a card carring libertarian. there is room for all. freedom is free, we should not be so wquick to judge others who may help in the long run. most Libs came from other parties, we welcome them all!
rhywun|11.17.08 @ 12:18PM|#
he accuses "libertarian faux-cons" of driving "the party even further away from its base of the hard-working middle class."
What an ass. Another reason we should be thankful we have people
who slog through delusional twaddle like that, so we don't have
to.
|11.17.08 @ 12:18PM|#
Epi - don't go bringing Calista Flockhart into the
discussion.
You were such an Ally McBeal watcher, weren't you. Just admit it,
dude--you're in a safe place.
Andrew Ian Dodge|11.17.08 @ 12:24PM|#
Huckabee is a Christian Democrat in the European sense. He is paternalistic, patronising and would make a horrible President.
|11.17.08 @ 12:26PM|#
Can you think of another Republican that Obama would prefer to
run against in 2012.
Obama v. Huckabee in 2012 would produce the biggest
Democrat landslide since 1964.
The Angry Optimist|11.17.08 @ 12:27PM|#
I swear I wasn't. I was almost ostracized at one point because I think Letterman had that dancing baby on his show and I looked around the room and asked "What the fuck is this? It's creeping me out".
|11.17.08 @ 12:30PM|#
Does he give skelatio?
Yes, but he's not very popular around the glory hole. Think: Chicks
with braces.
|11.17.08 @ 12:32PM|#
Letterman had that dancing baby on his show and I looked
around the room and asked "What the fuck is this? It's creeping me
out"
I will believe you because a similar thing happened to me, though
it was in the office because I'm not masochistic enough to watch
Letterman.
Skelator? Does he give skelatio?
Do you want him to?
|11.17.08 @ 12:33PM|#
PongePaul,
Uh yeah, I was off my meds there, but I'm feeling MUCH better
now.
I didn't mean to say that there aren't any libertarian types in the
GOP. What I mean to say, is that they are counter productive. Ever
since 68, the GOP has been a foe to freedom. Giving support to the
GOP has been aiding and abetting the enemy ever since. That
remained true in the Reagan years in spite of his campaign
rhetoric.
|11.17.08 @ 12:34PM|#
Can you think of another Republican that Obama would prefer
to run against in 2012.
Easily. Palin, for one.
Mike Huckabee is one of the few Republicans who would actually give
Obama a run for his money, Bobby Jindal being the other.
Laissez faire is in the toilet with the American public right now.
DO NOT WANT! Huckabee's populism is one of the few brands of
conservatism that might resonate with the public, and he actually
has wit and charisma.
|11.17.08 @ 12:36PM|#
"You give me head, it makes it worse
take out your fucking retainer and put it in your purse."
|11.17.08 @ 12:41PM|#
In 2012 the whole planet will be deep in depression. Civil war and anarchy will consume the once developing world, and civilization itself will be on the verge of collapse. Obama will be reelected in a landslide.
Mosby|11.17.08 @ 12:42PM|#
The American public, Mike Huckabee probably included, doesn't
even know what laissez faire means.
Mike Huckabee is literally the worst of all worlds.
|11.17.08 @ 12:43PM|#
OH please! Huckabee fooled the religious community into thinking
he was 'conservative' just because he's a pastor and pro-life...
but he really ruled Arkansas more liberally than Bill Clinton and
was connected to all the same players in that state.
Huckabee = FRAUD
|11.17.08 @ 12:43PM|#
Will Neil Boortz finally give up on this guy? His support for the Fair Tax alone doesn't warrent backing such a anti-capitalist ass. Especially considering the most popular president in history couldn't get the sales tax past the tax manipulating power mongers in congress.
DRUMZ|11.17.08 @ 12:55PM|#
"Socially conservative" does NOT mean "religious." Until
Huckabee, and the other Religio-Cons understand that, the GOP is
toast.
Yeah. I said "religio-cons." Its a word. I just made it up.
Lefiti|11.17.08 @ 1:00PM|#
"I want to be emphatic in stating my sincere respect for
Congressman Paul. I was convinced that he at least had genuine
convictions and was willing to stand by them and on them no matter
what the audience"
What a fucking crock! Ron Paul was willing to let his name stand on
the most vicious racist vitriol. The only reason it didn't
completely do him in is that he's so fucking irrelevant that nobody
fucking cares what he does.
Franklin Harris|11.17.08 @ 1:07PM|#
Huckabee trains a lot of fire on the Club for Growth, who had another tough election cycle, with 2006 victors Rep. Tim Walberg (MI) and Rep. Bill Sali (ID) going down in the Obama wave, joined by prize recruit Andy Harris in Maryland's first district.
Club For Growth = pro-war supply siders who occasionally pretend to
be libertarians.
|11.17.08 @ 1:18PM|#
The socialists at the OC Register shred the "blame the poor for
the mortgage meltdown" lie.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/loans-subprime-banks-2228728-law-lenders
Nash|11.17.08 @ 1:44PM|#
"Huckabee's populism is one of the few brands of conservatism
that might resonate with the public, and he actually has wit and
charisma."
His politics are a horrific mix of Hillary Clinton and Pat
Robertson. He's "conservative" on guns and life and that's all.
Economically he's left wing and loves tax and spend programs and in
terms of social freedoms he's the worst kind of
authoritarian.
The American people will love this guy.
economist|11.17.08 @ 2:01PM|#
"Mike Huckabee is one of the few Republicans who would actually
give Obama a run for his money"
Okay, WHO'S SPOOFING JOE?
economist|11.17.08 @ 2:03PM|#
"and he actually has wit and charisma."
Guys, really, it's not funny to put complete idiocies in joe's
mouth.
economist|11.17.08 @ 2:04PM|#
If I'm wrong, then I would suggest joe go to a physician to make sure he didn't catch anything south of the border.
|11.17.08 @ 2:05PM|#
Do I understand it correctly that Huckabee, the social conservative, is accusing libertarians not of being socially liberal, but of not being fiscally liberal?
projecthappy|11.17.08 @ 2:08PM|#
This is just another example of how the GOP wants to lose. In a 2 party system you take any groups you can get. Do the Democrats try to kick out the Communists, enviro-wackos, or any of their more "radical" groups? No, they've been pulling them altogether. The GOP wants to be a tiny group pandering to a few interests. They'll keep losing.
|11.17.08 @ 2:13PM|#
economist, remind me, how did your election predictions work out
this year?
It's a bad idea to project your own preferences onto the populace
at large. Lord knows I'M not a Mike Huckabee fan, but he's a
skilled politician.
|11.17.08 @ 2:20PM|#
"Laissez faire is in the toilet with the American public right
now."
Laissez faire didn't cause our present economic problems.
economist|11.17.08 @ 2:21PM|#
joe,
I didn't really make any election predictions, because I didn't
want to have to eat crow afterwards.
And Huckabee's policies are nothing but an extreme version of Bush
policies. If people are really tired of Bush era policies and want
to avoid them in the future, they would never vote for Mike
Huckabee. Then again, most people lack common sense.
economist|11.17.08 @ 2:22PM|#
joe,
Correction, I made one election prediction: I would be incredibly
displeased with the results. And I was proven correct on that
count.
|11.17.08 @ 2:29PM|#
Sigh. Yes, bookworm, True Socialism didn't fail, because True
Socialism has never been tried.
Regardless of how accurate your statement is, the public is about
as eager to hear an anti-regulatory, anti-safety net message as
they are eat live worms.
"economist,"
I didn't really make any election predictions, because I didn't
want to have to eat crow afterwards.
Good. Go with that. Stop opining about the political preferences of
the American public.
|11.17.08 @ 2:33PM|#
joe, True Socialism has been tried. The problem is that, like some theoretical subatomic particle that has never been directly observed, it disintegrates into something else in a nanosecond. The only thing we are able to detect is the aftermath of it's having been tried.
economist|11.17.08 @ 2:35PM|#
joe,
You're probably right. The majority of people probably could buy
into Huckabee's populism. Which is why I think it's perfectly fair
for me to say that the majority of people are idiots who deserve to
be mocked.
|11.17.08 @ 2:35PM|#
"National media coverage didn't present an accurate image of the
real Palin."
What is the real Palin?
|11.17.08 @ 2:39PM|#
"the public is about as eager to hear an anti-regulatory,
anti-safety net message as they are eat live worms."
Then why did the polls show that the majority of the public were
opposed to the bailouts?
Fluffy|11.17.08 @ 2:50PM|#
Sigh. Yes, bookworm, True Socialism didn't fail, because
True Socialism has never been tried.
The problem, joe, is that I could just as reasonably claim that the
Bush administration demonstrated the failure of socialism as I
could that it demonstrated the failure of libertarianism. Maybe
more reasonably.
And I have to say that I think your belief in Huckabee's viability
is probably influenced by the fact that he's the most like a
Democrat of any prominent national Republican. That makes it
natural for him to look viable to you.
I look at him and I see nothing but a Democrat who believes that
women are inferior and should be slaves - and I don't think that
particular combination translates into electoral viability.
The Angry Optimist|11.17.08 @ 3:01PM|#
Sigh. Yes, bookworm, True Socialism didn't fail, because
True Socialism has never been tried.
Is that what he said, joe? Did he say "true laissez-faire policies
haven't been tried", or did he simply say "laissez-faire is not
responsible"?
There's a difference. Learn it.
|11.17.08 @ 3:36PM|#
That son of a female hippo asked for our wrath. He can
double-speak and dance around his words all he wants, it won't do a
damn thing to save his political future from now on.
...but to be fair to huckabee I only say that to my dearest
friends.
|11.17.08 @ 3:45PM|#
Hazel,
joe, True Socialism has been tried... Yes, I know. My
point was that this excuse gets trotted out by both sides - that
the problem is that the attempt just wasn't pure enough.
bookworm,
Then why did the polls show that the majority of the public
were opposed to the bailouts? 1. They only showed that
initially, with most people now grudgingly accepting that bailouts
were necessary, and 2. they were asked about those particular
bailouts, not government activism in the economy in whole, or in
theory.
The problem, joe, is that I could just as reasonably claim that
the Bush administration demonstrated the failure of socialism as I
could that it demonstrated the failure of libertarianism. Maybe
more reasonably.
Be that as it may, and I'm not really intested in that discussion
right now, on the issue of public opinion, most people are not down
on Bush for being insufficinetly laissez-faire, and are not looking
at the current economic situation and thinking it was caused by too
much regulation. Quite the opposite.
And I have to say that I think your belief in Huckabee's
viability is probably influenced by the fact that he's the most
like a Democrat of any prominent national Republican. Wow. As
an actual Democrat, and not someone who loathes the Democrats and
sees them only from an outside perspective, I can easily come up
with a list of a half-dozen Republicans who are more like Democrats
than Huckabee. Just off the top of my head, there's Snowe, Collins,
McCain and Ahnold.
Bill Clinton said in an interview last Spring that he's not
surprised Huckabee was doing well, because "He's the only one of
them (the Republican candidates) who can give a speech or tell a
joke." Bill Clinton knows a thing or two about being a good
candidate.
|11.17.08 @ 3:47PM|#
My goodness! Is anyone trying to divide and destroy the conservative movement more effectively than Huckabee? In this trying time for conservatives when they are searching for something to rally behind, all Huckabee can do is throw darts at everyone that he should be working WITH to move America forwards.
|11.17.08 @ 3:48PM|#
TAO,
There's a difference. No, not really. Not in this context
anyway.
I'm sure you can spent hours telling me about some time and place
that really did have a laissez-faire economic policy. Not really
relevant here.
|11.17.08 @ 3:51PM|#
i wonder if teh huckster could tell me what conservatism really
is.
i'm dying to know
Fluffy|11.17.08 @ 3:55PM|#
Joe,
Unless the ENTIRE EXTENT of your argument for Huckabee's viability
is the fact that you think he tells a joke well, you're all
wet.
If you think that ANY ASPECT WHATSOEVER of Huckabee's viability is
based on his "populism", then you are in fact projecting viability
on Huckabee because of his Democratness.
I think you are calculating: "Huckabee is a populist, and da people
sure do like populism, therefore Huckabee would be a viable
candidate for high national office." That middle section of your
reasoning is the part that makes sense to you because you are a
Democrat.
Bill|11.17.08 @ 4:12PM|#
Who's this faux conservative?
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of
conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a
misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals...The
basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference
or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this
is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism
is."
-- Ronald Reagan
http://www.reason.com/news/show/29318.html
But he was just a blip in the Republican party...some crazy fringe
character I guess.
|11.17.08 @ 4:15PM|#
Fluffy,
I daresay that looking at the results and shape of the presidential
campaign would suggest to an objective observer that populist,
wealth-spreading, left-leaning economic policies are more popular
than the alternative among the American public right now.
I really don't think it's my storied inability to accurately
perceive political reality that makes me conclude that.
Andy|11.17.08 @ 4:15PM|#
Yeah, Huckabee scares the shit out of me. He could easily run a
workable campaign in four years, especially if Obama doesn't wave
his hand and fix every problem we have. Hollywood will rush to
defend their golden boy after any mistake or criticism, and the
"dumb masses" will despise it. He wouldn't neccessarily have to run
an anti-gay marriage campaign, since Obama doesn't support it
either.
The question is - Would Huckabee have a better chance of getting
the FairTax installed or getting socially conservative positions
installed? And which would be harder to get rid of? It's almost
worth voting for him if Obama is as liberal as some think he will
be. I still fucking hate the guy though. The people who make him
popular are what's wrong with this country (well they're not the
only thing, but...)
|11.17.08 @ 4:29PM|#
Fluffy,
I singled out two Republicans as being particularly strong
candidates: Huckabee and Jindal.
Did I choose Jindal because he's "practically a Democrat" too?
ChrisO|11.17.08 @ 5:22PM|#
I daresay that looking at the results and shape of the
presidential campaign would suggest to an objective observer that
populist, wealth-spreading, left-leaning economic policies are more
popular than the alternative among the American public right
now.
Right now =/= 2012. A couple of years of Democrats Gone Wild will
ensure that.
The GOP, to be viable, needs to stand for something bigger than
being "kind of like Democrats, but slightly more fiscally
responsible."
Huckabee is a garden variety southern populist, closer to Huey Long
than to Barry Goldwater. The party affiliation is largely a matter
of practicality, I'm sure.
|11.17.08 @ 5:55PM|#
I've no comment on the delusional rantings of that ignorant
hillbilly whackjob preacher, I just feel obligated, almost an
obsession, to post "ignorant hillbilly whackjob preacher" when I
see the word Huckabee.
I may have to seek professional help for this. ;-)
|11.17.08 @ 7:00PM|#
I take exception to "ignorant." He seems to be a very well-informed...er..hillbilly whackjob preacher.
|11.17.08 @ 7:08PM|#
I agree with Mike Huckabee...libertarians are social liberals...that is not conservative. while I agree with libertarian types like Goldwater and Dr. Paul...I left the libertarian party due to their hate for Christians, and that the LP seems to draw the addicted folk, to drugs, to porn, to gambling, to gay marriage. Thomas Paine "Common Sense" spoke of moral societies. There is no way to have individual freedom unless you have a moral society...immorality forces government force. Please go read Thomas Paine Society and Government.
Xenophage|11.17.08 @ 7:19PM|#
Sigh.
After all, Mike, if we don't hate gay people and smokers we're all
going to Hell anyway so what's it matter if we have any
freedom?
|11.17.08 @ 10:00PM|#
Mike Huckabee is a slick talking hillbilly who will trick alot
of rednecks and evangelicals into Bushism.
We need a conservative that believes in limited decentralized
government. Huckabee aint that guy.
|11.18.08 @ 2:45AM|#
Call the Club For Growth "fiscally conservative" or something
like that, but I refuse to consider them libertarian. They and
their cronies went after Republicans that while often far from
libertarian themselves, were targeted for such transgressions as
being anti-war and having gay brothers.
And people like "Steve Moore" are more GOP shill than "libertarian"
in any sense of the word.
If "libertarian"= opposing politicians for having gay brothers and
being anti-war, then I guess I will turn in my membership card.
|11.18.08 @ 2:14PM|#
I find it slightly more than amusing how it's the libertarians' fault for everything that *somebody else* screws up.
And more so, that everybody uses us as the go-to political
scapegoat or threat, at least when they're not smugly reminding us
of how vanishingly little power, support, or influence we have.
We're alternately the International Cosmopolitan Menace or the
handful of blue druids.
There's got to be a psyche study in that.
economist|11.18.08 @ 7:10PM|#
"I find it slightly more than amusing how it's the libertarians'
fault for everything that *somebody else* screws up."
What can I say? We're the Jews of the body politic.
I'm a Jew,
a lonely Jew,
I can't be merry
'cause I'm Hebrew
On Christmas
How can we adapt this to libertarians and election days?
Tuck Neilson|11.19.08 @ 11:56AM|#
Recognizing the "stupid's" pending attacks on my name, let's
just look at the science for a moment. There are numerous studies
that show that the higher your IQ, the more education you have, the
more you rely on logic to make decisions, the greater charitable
contributions you make in life, and the happier you are in general,
then the more likely you are to vote Republican. So who do the
"stupids" in the world really vote for? Similarly, the unhappy and
the stingy?
Look at the studies, not the twisted emotions that drive your
hatred.
Tuck
|11.22.08 @ 8:02PM|#
Steven Moore and his Club for Growth are full of shit.
I actually saw this guy speak in Louisville about six years ago. He
told a bunch of whoopers about how George Bush is really a nice guy
who cares about everybody and everything.
He then told us that we didn't have to worry about the National
Debt because we had supply side economics.
He did this and charged peopl $1,000 to see him. Luckily I got to
see him for free.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245