After publishing two posts that were critical of Huckabee over the last two days, I was not planning on doing another one, but like a bad case of diarrea, Joe Carter pulls me back in, making a challenge to “put up or hush up” about Mike Huckabee’s liberal tendencies.
Instead of challenging me personally, this time he makes an open challenge to anyone:
“I think it is clearly time that both sides of the “Huckabee is a liberal” dispute either “put up or hush up.” I want to start by allowing others to convince me that I am wrong.”
Once again, Tommy Oliver is happy to accept a challenge. In this first part I will only focus on taxes and immigration. First, let’s see what Larry Kudlow thought of what would be the worst possible outcome of the Iowa Caucus:
The worst outcome in tomorrow’s Iowa caucuses for the stock market and economy would be victories by Mike Huckabee and John Edwards.
Both are anti-business, anti-Wall Street, and anti-CEO. They would employ government regulation, and perhaps taxes, to work against free-market forces.
Both are anti-trade. Both are tax-and-spend. (Governor Huckabee has tried to inoculate himself against the tax charge with his Fair Tax national sales tax idea that would go nowhere in Washington.)
The key point is that Edwards and Huckabee are the left-wing populists in the campaign on economic policy. Their victories would send up a red-flag warning signal to a stock market already beleaguered by worries about an economic slowdown and the ongoing subprime credit problem.
Challenge to Joe: Can you name any respected conservative economist that actually support Huckabee? (Neil Boortz doesn’t count)
Since Joe is not redifining the common definition of conservatism, he is challenging anyone to make this argument on modern conservative points. Fair enough…
Huckabee’s problems with fiscal conservatives have been well documented. By now, everyone knows about his career grade of a “D” from the CATO Institute (the same grade another former Arkansas Governor received… Bill Clinton), and most know about his problems with the Club for Growth. So, has Huckabee just been given the short end of the stick? 21 tax increases went into effect, increasing tax revenue by almost $890 million under Governor Huckabee. These increases include the income tax, the sales tax, a cigarette tax, and a gas tax. Not only did he raise taxes, spending “more than doubled under Huckabee. “During Huckabee’s 10 years as governor, state spending more than doubled, from $6.6 billion to $16.1 billion in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2006.”
Fact: the average Arkansan’s tax burden grew from $ 1, 969 in the fiscal year that ended June 30, 1997, to $ 2, 902 in the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2005, including local taxes.
The Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration confi rms 90 tax cuts from 1997-2005. All but one required an act of the Legislature. Many were strongly backed by legislators and owe little to the governor’s efforts. The 90 cuts reduced tax collections by $ 378 million, according to the Department of Finance and Administration. Meanwhile, the department counts 21 tax increases that raised collections by $ 883.1 million. Here are a few of the tax cuts, along with the department’s estimate of their impact in the following fiscal year 1997
• Authorized tax-exempt bonds for fi re-ant abatement (- $ 100, 000 )
• Exempted residential lawn care from the sales tax (- $ 210, 000 )
• Exempted Heifer International from the sales tax (- $ 60, 000 )
• Exempted some county fairs from the special-events sales tax (- $ 15, 000 ) 1999
• Exempted equipment used to produce sod, grass and nursery products from the sales tax (- $ 200, 000 )
• Repealed the 20 percent tax on bingo admissions and cards (- $ 200, 000 ) 2001
• Reduced taxes on bets made on horse races at Oaklawn Park (- $ 1, 700, 000 )
• Reduced taxes on bets made at Southland Greyhound Park (- $ 600, 000 ) 2003
• Exempted some health-club services from the sales tax (- $ 160, 000 )
• Gave income-tax credits to biodiesel wholesalers (- $ 200, 000 ) 2005
• Granted an income-tax deduction for organ donation (- $ 76, 000 )
• Exempted Arkansas Symphony Orchestra purchases from the sales tax (- $ 20, 530 )SOURCES: Department of Finance and Administration
FACT: a review of tax legislation passed while he was governor shows a net tax increase of $ 505 million, a figure adjusted for inflation and economic growth, according to the state Department of Finance and Administration.
FACT: Huckabee shepherded through the Legislature one of the largest tax cuts in Arkansas history – a 1997 income-tax reduction totaling about $ 90. 6 million its first full year in effect. But most of the 89 other cuts Huckabee mentions are much smaller. A 1997 sales-tax break for some manufacturing machinery reduced tax collections by just $ 500 a year, for example. Some were narrowly targeted, such as a tax exemption for purchases by the Salvation Army, which reduced tax collections by $ 15, 000 a year. (Northwest Arkansas News)
The Arkansas Leader publishes a comprehensive list of tax hikes by Mike, as compared to Clinton:
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 governor’s 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 driver’s license by $6 a person, from $14 to $20 (Act 1500 of 2001)
Immigration:
In 2005, Huckabee was quite vocal in his opposition to strengthen citizen verification procedures for employers and voting and cut off public assistance to illegal immigrants. He even went as far as describing the plan as “race baiting.” Huckabee said “Companies controlled by overseas corporations could feel they are unwanted in Arkansas if the Legislature approves an immigration measure now before it.” He described it as “inflammatory, race-baiting… demagoguery.” The bill forbade public assistance and voting rights to illegal immigrants. The Governor also went as far as to say, “(The Bill) inflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there’s a real problem… But there’s not.”
From CBS News:
Huckabee’s recent strong stand on immigration, including an intolerance toward companies that employ illegal immigrants, runs counter to the image he crafted in his final years in office. He was battling conservatives within his own party who were pushing for stricter state-level immigration measures.
Huckabee opposed a Republican lawmaker’s efforts in 2005 to require proof of legal status when applying for state services that aren’t federally mandated and proof of citizenship when registering to vote. Huckabee derided the bill as un-American and un-Christian and said the bill’s sponsor drank a different “Jesus juice.”
Roy Beck, the head of NumbersUSA and one of the leading advocates that helped defeat the McCain/Kennedy Immigration bill, on Huckabee:
“He was an absolute disaster on immigration as governor. Every time there was any enforcement in his state, he took the side of the illegal aliens.”
Peter Gadiel, president of 9-11 Families for a Secure America, on Mike Huckabee:
“Huckabee is the guy who scares the heck out of me.”
Steven A. Camarota, research director for the Center for Immigration Studies, on Mike Huckabee:
“I would say that Huckabee comes from the same perspective on the issue that George W. Bush came from – that out of a strong sense of compassion, he tries to identify with someone who comes to the United States, even if they came illegally.”
James J. Boulet Jr., executive director of English First, on Mike Huckabee:
“Huckabee’s worse than Hillary Clinton… When you call someone a racist, what you’re saying is, don’t listen to that bad man — you’re not engaging the argument, and the argument is there. I don’t see anywhere in the Bible where it says the way God wants us to help the poor is to lobby for the government to spend money on them… Mike Huckabee could very easily be the vice-presidential nominee. He is actually worse than Giuliani on illegal immigration. Huckabee has swallowed the Kool-Aid completely.”
Huckabee on the Bush Immigration Plan before it became the unpopular thing to support:
Huckabee said his faith leads him to take positions on issues — like immigration — that “tend to be a little unconventional.” On immigration, Huckabee aligns himself with President Bush rather than more conservative elements of the Republican Party, favoring a “pathway to citizenship” for those who at one time entered the United States illegally.
That’s the end of part I. Will only make a part II if Joe wants keep going.
January 12th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Thats right. Joe has been flattened.
One other comment: Huck is not like Bush on immigration, but like Hillary:
Huckabee: ‘Race-baiting ’ behind immigration bill
BY DAVID HAMMER THE ASSOCIATED PRES
This story was published Friday, January 28, 2005
Excerpts
“Gov. Mike Huckabee said Thursday that a bill to deny state government benefits and voting rights to illegal immigrants is “inflammatory… race-baiting and demagoguery.” He challenged the Christian values of its main sponsor.
See also press reports of Huck at LULAC in 2005 (Open door policy):
http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2005/06/30/News/323746.html
January 12th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
You put up, Joe SHUT UP.
January 12th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
You are preaching to the choir T.O. Huck has been running from his record from day one. There is no need to call him out on it, his base simply does not care what his record is. They go for the one liners and jokes.
January 12th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
#3 I agree. I wonder what kind of earth-shattering thing Huckabee would have to say in order to lose the support of his base. I’m thinking he could get away with about anything…
January 12th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Nice post Tommy. Very well reasoned and factually oriented. Huckabee is a liberal. Those sophisticated enough will understand that.
however he is no liberal on social issues. unfortuanetly, for most evangelicals, i assume at least, that is enough for them which is why he is in the race still.
January 12th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
4, I agree that Huck’s base will believe anything he says, even something as rediculous as “Wayne Dumond is a bigger problem for Hillary that it is for me.”
Still we need to keep pounding so as the field thins out, Huck doesn’t add to his base.
January 12th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
I haven’t figured out if pounding on Huck does anything but fortify his base. They seem to interpret as mean bad people attacking their friend. At this point, I think the best bet is to persuade the more intelligent and rational among them that there are better options. I think the problem (or advantage, if you’re Huckabee) is that his base is made up of a large percentage of emotional voters as opposed to rational voters.
January 12th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
huckabee also rented a consulate to the mexican governmetn for $1 a month to encourage fake ids to be given out. he is flat out pandering to get elected.
He cannot be trusted. just nominate him so barack or hillary can win a landslide the reagan era will surely be ancient history, not because the people didn’t agree with its principles, but because charlatons like huckabee and bush who claimed to be fiscal, social, and national defense conservatives, in actuality were not.
our nation will reject all around conservatism because those bearing its banner betrayed it!
Vote not on Huckabee!!
January 12th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
good info on Pastor Mike; gotta get it out there somehow over top the MSM so it will hopefully resonate sooner rather than later.
January 12th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
God’s candidate can do no wrong.
January 12th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
There is a very funny music video in which a song called “clemency” is sung to the tune of the old Beatles song “Yesterday”. I am trying to get a link of it. Its very funny.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
I know this has nothing to do with this article, but I believe Romney is done. I wish he wasn’t, but he will lose Michigan. And with that I turn my back to the Republican party. They are all liberals now….
January 12th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Quite interesting that over the last few days, when a comment about Huck goes up, his supporters come racing in to obfuscate. Here is a post full af facts and there is nary a sign of a Huckanut.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Yes the cut and paste Huck’s lies faster than the rest of us can tell the truth about Huck.
Maybe some of the real conservatives who thought Huck was a conservative are tired of defending his immigration record, his tax record and his soft on crime record, things which they are usually hitting the liberals for.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Liberal and conservative is not the same spectrum as right and left.
Liberal and conservative refer to the varying roles for innovation vs. tradition in ones approach to solving problems.
Left and right refers to the concerns of the poor, or average person vs. the concerns of the wealthy when it comes to economic issues. Demand-side vs. supply side, if you will.
There is no concievable way that Huckabee can be considered a “liberal”.
He does, however, break from recent Republican dogma in that he is more to the left than the rest of the party. He does not buy into the top-down, supply-side view that the only thing we should do to insure prosperity is t to attend to the concerns of those already succesful.
A conservative, slightly to the left. It is a position that seems to have been rhetorically obliterated in modern discourse, but it has long been a very coherent political position – it is essentially the position that the Catholic church has always taken. Moralism, with a concern for the interests of the poor.
People nowadays talk about socons and ficons, but what they really mean by that is conservative rightwing.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
OK, it looks like no one else seems willing to bite, so I’ll take a stab.
I’m not a Huckabopper, but those tax hikes seem rather modest and, in keeping with moralistic tradition, mostly could be considered “sin taxes,” since they’re mostly on nicotine and alcohol (and arguably sinful “greenhouse gas” emissions). If these modest marginal increases resulted in such a drastic increase state government, they sure must have been effective — perhaps Governor Mike drove people to drink?
The drastic increase in the size of state government could also be accounted for by welfare reform, which gave the states money to fund the program while requiring them to administer it locally.
Fire away!
January 12th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
16, and if he adds modest tax hikes as President, and a little modest spending, and driving of person’s to drink, just how big will government be and how high will the tax burden be at the end of Huck’s years? You think Bush blew it on spending, wait until you see Huck.
15, the old definitions of right/left lib/con etc. change over time and to grab on to a single point in time to try to make some self serving political point is both ineffective and boring.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
if he adds modest tax hikes as President
BUT! He signed the tax pledge, which allows no wiggle room for incremental, marginal rise.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
QuacknHack,
Thats a strange attitude for a conservative to have – that words have no core meaning, so lets just hurl them around as weapons against people we oppose. All this does is muddle everyones thinking, and wastes enormous amounts of time as we all end up talking past eachother because we are confused as to what the other is actually saying.
It is such discouse which is what is really boring.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
BTW: Slick Willy famously called his tax hikes “revenue enhancements.” I’ve also seen them done under the moniker of “closing tax loopholes” without any larger tax system overhaul. Someone should ask Mike if he sees any difference between those euphemisms and tax increases.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
He will declare and emergency and then raise taxes and offer some over the top moralistic explanation.
He has the same “I just wanna be loved” complex that afflicts Clinton.
As soon as the libs in AR started whining about welfare cuts, there was huck on the famous video begging for a tax, any tax, just so they would quit carping about him cutting welfare. There is a disaster in the making for fiscal policy if Huck is elected.
He used to call Repubs who signed no tax pledges in AR morons for signing them. WHat a hypocrit.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Tano the leftist, the terms are just general descriptions which change over time the way the political debate changes over time. To lock in on one moment in time and use the definition to defend policies rather than just defending the policies themselves is a real yawner, because the definintions change over time.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Tano, arnt you the guy who cannot understand that helping middle class sellers of labor by definition hurts middle class buyer of consumer products because of the increased labor costs of the products, which are ultimately paid for by the consumer?
January 12th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Tano,arnt you one of those leftists that talks about the angst of the middle class which is in part caused by higher energy prices, but then proposes a global warming policy that increases those energy prices?
January 12th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Hickabee will break that tax pledge the second Nancy Pelosi goes in front of the press corps and says: “President Huckabee will starve our children.”
My 9-11 Truther and Edwards supporting co-worker told me yesterday that he’s the only one in the GOP field he likes. That was all I needed to hear.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Huck has this inordinate fixation on press coverage of him, and once he is criticized he takes his core supporters for granted, and seeks only to mollify his critics, so his press coverage isn’t negative. Give them money to shut them up. The liberals in Washington would have a field day with that. This is Hucks version of the Dickie Morris triangulation strategy in which your core supporters get thown under the bus. This is the fate that awaits thse true believers who are, unlike Huckabee, true conservatives. Yes Brett Passmore, that means YOU.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
#12, don’t give up on Mitt. He’ll still be very alive.
January 12th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Wow. Excellent job, Tommy. You’ve laid out a well-researched and devastating case.
January 12th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Tommy,
Great research! It is true, he is a liberal. I am afraid though that the only thing that could hurt Huck among his supporters is if he were to tell them he no longer believed in God. Short of that they will buy any crap that spews from his mouth.
January 12th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Preach Brother Oliver . . . .Preach!! Love your post. Thanks for putting in the time to show Joe and everyone the fact that Huckabee is a liberal to the highest degree.
January 12th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
#12 – Please don’t give up!!! I spent a little over an hour today calling people in Michigan on behalf of Mitt Romney. The first lady I talked to was 91, a Weslyan (her husband, who past away, was a Weslyan pastor – for those in Rio Linda – that’s a Protestant denomination).
She said she was praying that Mitt Romney would be our next president and very much supports him.
I talked to Republicans, Democrats and Independents.
It was a great experience and I’m going to continue to call for Mitt — for Michigan, for South Carolina – and for every state thereafter.
It’s really easy to do — Mitt’s campaign calls your phone and makes the calls for you as you interact with the website. It doesn’t cost you a dime! Just time! It is so innovative — so Mitt!
We can make a big difference. It turned my sense of discouragement into empowerment!!
If you’re interested, go to http://www.moms4mitt.com and ask Heather what to do or contact Mitt’s staff at his website: http://www.mittromney.com
And, Tommy, great and powerful post! Huckabee is truly the enemy of the conservative movement. He is a real wolf in sheep’s clothing.
January 12th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Great article! Which proves the point of putting together a Mitt/Fred ticket. Even the rabid pro Fred site of redstate has just filed a story giving 7 reasons why we must have a mitt/fred team.
http://www.redstate.com/blogs/mark_i/2008/jan/11/romney_in_seven_words Could not explain it ANY better.
January 12th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Great Post. It’s about time someone started really analyzing Hucks positions.
January 12th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Just followed your link from E.O.
Nice job. I don’t know where Joe is coming from with his uncritical Huckabee praise. He’s not a bad guy. I think he’s just been hypnotized by the Huckabee song and dance. You must admit that Huckabee is good at what he does. If you don’t pay close attention you’ll get snookered.
Go Fred!
January 12th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Tommy,
With all the time and effort you’ve spent over the months creating numerous, elaborate and detailed attacks on Huckabee, why haven’t you found the time to explain Thompson’s accomplishments in the Senate? I’ve asked you on a few threads now what Thompson contributed to the Senate besides one vote in 100. Maybe you haven’t seen the questions. Do you have anything positive to talk about? You’re close to his campaign, so this should be easy for you.
What happened in the Senate that would not have happened if Fred weren’t there?
January 12th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Tommy,
Maybe you could start by explaining some bills in the Senate that Thompson authored and pushed through that would overall the tax system and cracked down on illegal immigration?
With all the details in this attack piece, surely you have Thompson’s bill numbers handy too?
January 12th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
If anybody else can point me in the direction of bills Thompson authored that relate to tax cuts, federalism, or illegal immigration, I’d appreciate it.
Thanks.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
MWS,
I spent months explaining the question you keep asking. If you had read any of them, you’d know.
http://race42008.com/2007/12/27/my-full-endorsement-of-fred-thompson/
January 12th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Nuclear Proliferation Act
Aviation Security Bill Amendment
Homeland Security Workforce Act
Homeland Security Education Act
Thompson Amendment to the National Homeland Security and Combating Terrorism Act
The Federal Emergency Procurement Flexibility Act
The Government Information Security Reform Act (GISRA)
The Thompson Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act
The Truth in Regulation Act
The Thompson Amendment Requiring Stricter Performance Standards for Aviation Security
The China Regulation Act
co authored the Homeland Security Act
January 12th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Tommy,
Let’s take one of those bills that passed and was signed into law, and you tell me what Thompson contributed to it. I’ll have to take your word for it, because there is a dearth of information out there on his contributions.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
Or you can go to this blog that I set up in April that extensively covers his accomplishments in the Senate.
http://www.fredthompsonpresidency.blogspot.com/
January 12th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
THOMPSON AMENDMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR BAGGAGE SCREENERS
Measure Will Provide Accountability to Aviation Security Bill
Thursday, October 4, 2001
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN) has introduced an amendment to the Aviation Security Act that will require the federal government to set and enforce strict standards to keep the flying public safe. The measure requires that those responsible for airport security be held accountable for meeting performance goals, from the head of the FAA to airport screeners.
“We have to send a strong message that no longer will it be business as usual when it comes to screening luggage at our airports. We need make sure that the screening workforce and their managers will be held accountable,†Thompson said. “One of the ways we can restore confidence in airline travel is by letting the American people know that strict screening standards are in place, and are being met.â€
Thompson noted the General Accounting Office has reported that average detection rates at airports throughout the country have decreased from about 95% in 1993 to 85% in 1999.
“Clearly, airport security operations have not been held accountable for their performance in the past,†he said. “There has been no carrot, and no stick. Now there will be. Those who perform well will be rewarded, those who don’t will be replaced. In addition, those in charge of overseeing this effort will be required to report to Congress so we can monitor the results.â€
Thompson’s amendment requires the new head of aviation security to:
C Implement results-based management in airport security operations, and;
C Undertake certain human capital changes designed to reinforce such management by holding employees – whether public or private – accountable for meeting performance standards.
To encourage this results-based management, Thompson’s amendment also does the following:
C Establishes a term limit (three to five years) for the head of aviation security, who may be reappointed if performance is satisfactory;
C Require annual performance agreements for head of aviation security and each senior manager setting out organizational and individual goals. Bonuses can be given for achievement of such goals.
C Establish an annual staff performance management system that includes setting individual, group, and organizational performance goals consistent with an annual performance plan.
The Thompson amendment also requires the new head of aviation security to establish specific performance standards and provide Congress with an action plan within 60 days to meet those levels; and to establish a long-term process for reporting performance results to Congress annually.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/100401thompsonpress.htm
January 12th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
Thompson Fights to Eradicate Tax Penalty on Public Servants
Thursday, July 11, 2002
Washington , DC – The Senate Finance Committee today approved an amendment, sponsored by Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN), that reduces a financial burden many presidential appointees face when they are required to divest their stock options as a condition of taking public office. The Thompson provision, which was included in the National Employee Savings and Trust Equity Act, removes the tax penalty on public servants by expanding the current certificate of divestiture program to include stock options under Investment Stock Option plans (ISO) and Employee Stock Purchase Plans (ESPP). Appointees can already be granted certificates when they sell shares of traditional stock.
“It is unfair to penalize willing public servants for complying with the law,” Thompson said. “Especially now as we continue to fight a war on terrorism, we must work to ensure that the best and brightest of the nation’s leaders continue to be attracted to public service, instead of constructing blockades to discourage them from serving their country.”
Conflict of interest statutes and ethics laws prohibit high-ranking government officials from holding a stake in companies that may be affected by their decisions. Therefore, many public servants are required to sell significant stock holdings before they can enter public office, regardless of their personal investment plans. Unfortunately, this can place a heavy tax burden on them simply for obeying the law.
To mitigate this penalty, Congress passed the Ethics Reform Act of 1989. This law contains a provision which allows ethics officials to grant a certificate of divestiture to appointees who are required to sell stock when they enter office. This allows the appointee to use the proceeds from the stock sale to purchase an approved investment without the immediate penalty of capital gains tax. The tax is deferred until the appointee decides to sell the approved investment holdings.
However, the certificate of divestiture program does not currently address ISO and ESPP stock options, which have become a common part of many corporate compensation packages. When appointees are required to divest their ISO or ESPP stock options without meeting the holding period requirements to obtain capital gains treatment, the gain on the sale is taxed as ordinary income, and not capital gains. The provision sponsored by Senator Thompson would expand the certificate of divestiture program to include all ISO and ESPP stock options.
“This amendment will end an unfair financial penalty on presidential appointees. While these top officials should always be held to the highest ethical standard, they shouldn’t have to pay heavily to get their jobs. We already have enough problems filling government’s top posts; we can do without this one. Today’s vote is a step in the right direction toward fixing the broken presidential appointments process,” concluded Thompson.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/071102press.htm
January 12th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Okay, Thompson wanted bags screened a month after 9-11. What a visionary.
Gosh, I bet without ol’ Fred, it would have never occurred to anyone on Captial Hill to tighten baggage screening.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
BTW.
Read this article by former GAO public affairs chief Jeff Nelligan if you want to understand exactly some of Thompson’s responsibilities as Chairman of the Government Affairs Committee:
http://www.jeffnelligan.com/2007/06/no-slacker-big-fred-grinds-it-out.html
We need to revisit the Improper Payments Information Act and focus on Appendix C to OMB Circular A-12. We’re looking at $21 billion in billing errors, and these H-codes gotta be adjusted, as per Clinger-Cohen.†Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN), press conference, Senate “Swamp”outside Capitol, May 21, 2001.
None of the five people reading this need my dim mind to weigh in on the Saga that is the race for the GOP presidential nomination. There are plenty of other seers who see this race with keener minds than mine, starting with Aaron “Be Free†Hase, Adventure Man and Blogmeister General. Indeed, of all the Republicans running, I have to say, as hackneyed as it sounds, that John McCain’s personal story is something that provides me with inspiration in many facets of my everyday life.
But the inevitable entry of ex-Senator Fred Thompson into the brawl-o-rama get this hack wound up like a cat in a rocking chair factory. No, the big man Tennessee doesn’t need zany Coastmaster in his corner but I feel the record needs correcting here. Every profile I’ve read on Thompson contains references, by the typical unnamed coward sources, to him being “lazyâ€, his Senate career lackluster, and gasp, there’s not a piece of legislation with his name on it! (Well gee, Teddy Kennedy has his name on a bunch of bills – and that’s made the nation a better place, n’cest pa?)
My experience with Senator Thompson dates to when I was the public affairs chief for GAO, the Government Accountability Office, a legislative branch agency providing oversight of the feds. Thompson was chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, the complementary panel to GAO. It’s kind of a backwater committee, with not the visibility of say, Foreign Affairs, or Armed Services, or Appropriations. But the committee is essential to investigating the mechanics of government – and how those gears can be made to work more efficiently.
So yeah, Thompson was a big show boater – a huge proponent of the Clinger-Cohen Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996, doncha know; which required that the “government information technology shop be operated exactly as an efficient and profitable business would be operated.†Then there was his support for the President’s Management Agenda, announced in the summer of 2001, “an aggressive strategy for improving the management of the Federal government…focusing on Expanding E-Government: Improved Service Delivery for the American People Using Information Technology and Expanding E-Government: Partnering for a Results-Oriented Government.†Yowzah, man, hot Hot HOT! Front page baby!
Thompson was committed back of GAO’s High Risk list, another blockbuster for serious students of government but relegated to a desultory affair, that identified those agencies in government that were performing sup par, wasting taxpayer dollars, and thus needed fixing.
These are the kinds of endeavors that are dull as dishwater but vital as air for those who want a Government That Works. Thompson was the guy who knew all these arcane subsections and cites, and while other members were dancing around getting headlines on the issue of the day, Thompson was grinding it out in Committee; I know, I had to attend those hearings and they were full of minutiae.
In fact, of the many Members I’ve dealt with in my primo roll as the number-one Hill hack, Thompson was one of the two or three who always impressed me as immersed in details, the guy who took on these arcane and non-headline issues, and pursued them doggedly. Another, coincidentally enough, was Senator Joe Lieberman, ranking on the Committee and a genuine friend of Thompson’s.
So we zing to the press conference outside the Senate, with just a few journalists, with Thompson going on calmly about improper payments and Medicare, the maddening system of billings done by Medicare providers that involved waste, fraud and abuse with a capital WFA. Then- OMB director Mitch Daniels was with Thompson, but Thompson knew this subject matter cold.
So now I hear the stories about Thompson, which are typical of 1. Opponents who want to drag him down, which is the way it works, and 2. A lazy press corps who but for a few stalwarts, didn’t cover this subject matter when Thompson was preaching at the wind.
Now, I’m too much of a nothing burger to have any say in this race. But Thompson, whatever his faults, is not getting a fair shake. When you’re waxing on about OMB circulars and Clinger-Cohen’s e-billing protocols, you’re not exactly lazy or lackluster. In fact, you’re actually doing what government is supposed to be doing, which is trying to do better.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
“The Senate Finance Committee today approved an amendment, sponsored by Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN), that reduces a financial burden many presidential appointees face when they are required to divest their stock options as a condition of taking public office.”
I’ll sleep better tonight knowing that Fred took the lead in reducing the tax burden presidential appointees face when divesting their stock options.
Whew, that’s a big load off my mind!
January 12th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
MWS,
Thompson wasn’t a spotlight hog during his time in the Senate. He was instrumental in the creation of the Homeland Security department. As Chairman of the Government Affairs Committee, national security was his responsiblity uand he continued to have oversight of the department after its creation.
CAGW PRAISES THOMPSON REPORT ON FEDERAL MISMANAGEMENT
Washington, D.C. – Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today commended U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), the outgoing chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, for a report released today documenting the federal government’s staggering levels of waste, abuse, and mismanagement. Thompson presented the report, which includes his recommendations for addressing those problems, to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Mitch Daniels at a press conference in Washington.”Once again, Chairman Thompson deserves great credit for exposing the pervasive problems in the federal government,” CAGW President Tom Schatz said. “As CAGW has documented repeatedly, many federal agencies and programs are duplicative, unaccountable, nontransparent, get poor results, lose money, are mismanaged, and outdated. These problems have persisted for decades, and as this report indicates, are growing worse and require rapid action.” Thompson’s report includes analysis of the four biggest challenges facing the federal government: workforce management, financial management, information technology management, and overlap and duplication. In addition, the report includes an agency-by-agency appendix citing examples of waste, fraud, and abuse. The report also contains a list of the “Top Ten” worst examples of mismanagement in the government.”As CAGW has documented for 17 years, every year the federal government literally flushes hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars down the drain,” Schatz added. “It is a disgrace and would be intolerable in any sphere outside government. Hopefully, the new Democrat majority in the Senate will follow Thompson’s lead to root out waste and work with President Bush for reform.” “OMB Director Daniels deserves thanks from taxpayers for remaining focused on a common-sense waste-cutting agenda, and this report will help him target some of the worst bloat for elimination,” Schatz concluded. “CAGW continues to recommend the White House empanel a nonpartisan waste commission for a stem to stern audit of the government. This is the surest way to achieve fundamental and lasting reform.”CAGW is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse in government.
http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_NewsRelease_06052001b
January 12th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
CONGRESS PASSES THOMPSON LEGISLATION PROMOTING
PUBLIC’S RIGHT TO KNOW COSTS AND BENEFITS OF REGULATION
Washington, D.C. — Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Fred Thompson (R-TN) announced that the FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Bill, passed by the House yesterday and the Senate today, includes language Thompson introduced that will require the government to disclose the benefits and the costs of federal regulatory programs to the American people.
“It’s time that we acknowledge the public’s right to know the benefits and costs of government regulations,” Thompson said. “That’s why I sponsored this regulatory accounting legislation. It will shed light on the benefits and burdens of federal regulations, and it will hold federal regulators more accountable to make smart, cost-effective decisions that get real results.”
The federal government has largely ignored the “off-budget” costs of government — the economic burdens that federal regulations place on families, businesses, and state and local governments.
Thompson said he was pleased that Majority Leader Trent Lott, along with Senators John Breaux (D-LA), Charles Robb (D-VA) and Richard Shelby (R-AL), cosponsored an early version of the language, which passed the Senate unanimously in July as an amendment to the Treasury-Postal Appropriations Bill, S.2312.
“We represent diverse political viewpoints, but we all agree that we need to improve our regulatory system and make it more open and accountable,” Thompson said. “I’m pleased that both Republicans and Democrats can come together to make our government more efficient and effective.”
The Thompson Amendment builds on and strengthens the regulatory accounting provision passed by Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) in 1996. The Thompson language requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to provide Congress with an accounting statement of the total annual benefits and costs of federal regulatory programs in February 2000, along with a summary of public comments and suggestions for doing things better. It also requires the OMB to analyze the impacts of federal rules on state and local government, as well as small business. The amendment also requires OMB guidelines to the agencies and independent peer review of the report to improve the quality of these reports.
“This legislation will help hold federal regulators accountable and reduce needless waste and red tape,” Thompson said. “It will improve efforts to protect public health, safety and the environment, and to promote the economic security and well-being of our families and communities.”
The cost of federal regulatory programs is estimated at $700 billion a year. The goal of this legislation is to help assess and improve the performance of those programs.
Attached are Thompson’s October 9 floor remarks.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/102198press.htm
January 12th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
” Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today commended U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), the outgoing chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, for a report released today documenting the federal government’s staggering levels of waste, abuse, and mismanagement. ”
That’s like shooting fish in a barrel. I’ve seen bloggers that are pretty good at that too.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
THOMPSON INTRODUCES FEDERALISM ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
Bill Will Protect Authority of State and Local Governments
Washington, DC — Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Fred Thompson (R-TN) introduced legislation late yesterday to protect state and local governments from unchecked federal intrusion. The “Federalism Accountability Act†would impose accountability on Congress and the Executive Branch before they could override state and local law.
“The Founding Fathers divided power between the federal government and the states. The constitutional principle of federalism — embodied in the Tenth Amendment — raises two fundamental questions that policy makers should answer: What should government be doing? And what level of government should do it? Everything else flows from them. That’s why federalism is at the heart of our democracy,†said Senator Thompson.
“Our governmental structure is based on an optimistic belief in the power of people and their communities,†added Thompson. “I share that view.â€
A recent General Accounting Office report shows that there has been gross noncompliance with a 1987 executive order directing federal agencies to prepare federalism assessments for actions that would preempt state and local laws. In a review of over 11,000 issued over a 3-year period, GAO found that the agencies had prepared only five federalism assessments under the executive order.
“Congress and the Administration should not take lightly the preemption of state and local laws,†Thompson said. “We need to face the fact that Congress too often has acted as if it has a general police power to engage in any issue, no matter how local. Both Congress and the Executive Branch have neglected to consider prudential and constitutional limits on their powers.â€
The Federalism Accountability Act would:
· require Congress and agencies to issue an explicit statement of congressional or agency intent when they preempt state or local law, and if so, an explanation of the reasons for such preemption;
· require each agency head to designate a federalism officer to implement the requirements of this legislation and to serve as a liaison to state and local officials;
· require agencies early on to notify, consult with, and provide an opportunity for meaningful participation by state and local public officials that could potentially be affected by a rule;
· require agencies to provide a federalism assessment for rules that have federalism impacts;
· require the Congressional Budget Office to compile a report on preemptions by federal rules, court decisions, and legislation;
· amend the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 to clarify that performance measures for state-administered grant programs are to be determined in cooperation with public officials;
· and amend the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 to clarify that major new requirements imposed on states under entitlement authority are to be scored by CBO as unfunded mandates. It also would require that when Congress caps the federal share of an entitlement program, the Committee report and the accompanying CBO report must analyze whether the legislation includes new flexibility or whether there is existing flexibility to offset additional costs.
This legislation was developed with representatives of the “Big 7″ organizations representing State and local government, including the National Governors’ Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the Council of State Governments, the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the International City/County Management Association.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/061199_press.htm
January 12th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
“Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Fred Thompson (R-TN) announced that the FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Bill, passed by the House yesterday and the Senate today, includes language Thompson introduced that will require the government to disclose the benefits and the costs of federal regulatory programs to the American people.”
Now that one is actually pretty decent, if there is actually a way to do it without it getting bogged down in partisan spin. The costs and benefits of regulation is to a large degree in the eye of the beholder. I’ll give him a half point for that one.
Where is Fred’s immigration bill?
January 12th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
MWS,
Go to the site and read the full 350 page report on Government waste. Something that Huckabee didn’t understand since Government sixe INCREASED 20% under his watch in AR.
(Washington, DC) – Many Members of Congress talked about strengthening America’s economic security last year, but far fewer consistently backed up their words with votes. Today a Capitol Hill ceremony sponsored by the 335,000-member National Taxpayers Union (NTU) presented “Taxpayers’ Friend Awards†to an elite group of 36 lawmakers who earned top scores on the group’s comprehensive and widely-respected Rating of Congress in 2002.
“Not all Members of Congress fought day in and day out during 2002 for the principle of limited government that is the cornerstone of our country’s greatness,†said NTU President John Berthoud. “Fortunately, at least 36 allies in Congress demonstrated an unwavering commitment to taxpayers. We are proud to honor this fiscal ‘coalition of the willing.’â€
NTU officials furnished a special certificate to “Taxpayers’ Friend Award†winners during the ceremony that recognized each recipient’s efforts to “further the cause of vitally needed fiscal integrity.â€
The Rating, which since 1978 has been based on every roll call vote affecting fiscal policy, assigns a “Taxpayer Score†to each Member of Congress that indicates his or her support for reducing or controlling federal spending, taxes, debt, and regulation. In the year 2002, a total of 139 House and 115 Senate roll call votes were selected. The average Taxpayer Score was 41 percent in the House – roughly equal to 2001’s mark. However, averages slumped significantly in the Senate, to 40 percent in 2002 versus 46 percent the year before.
Lawmakers who received the Taxpayers’ Friend Award for the year 2002 had to achieve a score of at least 64 percent in the House or 70 percent in the Senate. The highest scorers in the House and Senate, respectively, were Ron Paul (R-TX) with 88 percent and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) with 82 percent.
NTU is a non-profit, non-partisan citizen organization founded in 1969 to work for lower taxes, less wasteful spending, and accountable government at all levels. Note: The 2002 Rating, which reports Taxpayer Scores for all lawmakers, is available via fax or online at http://www.ntu.org. Staff members are available for comment on particular scores. Recipients of the 2002 Taxpayers’ Friend Award follow:
John Ensign (NV) Jon Kyl (AZ) Rick Santorum (PA)
Mike Enzi (WY) Richard Lugar (IN) Craig Thomas (WY)
Phil Gramm (TX) Don Nickles (OK) Fred Thompson (TN)
http://www.ntu.org/main/press_release_printable.php?PressID=113&org_name=NTU
January 12th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Fred was one of the author’s of the HOMELAND SECURITY ACT. That was his jurisdiction, not immigration.
Thompson Earns “Restoring the Balance” Award from National Conference of State Legislatures
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, has been selected to receive the 2000 “Restoring the Balance Award,” presented by the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). The award, given annually to national policymakers committed to federalism and its impact on issues involving state legislators, was presented to Thompson last night at the NCSL’s Leader to Leader Dinner in Washington.
“Fred Thompson has been a steadfast and dedicated friend of federalism,” said NCSL President Jim Costa. “He has demonstrated an exemplary commitment to protecting state authority and to strengthening intergovernmental relations and program partnerships.”
Thompson’s dedication to the principles of federalism and sound government policy has resulted in the Committee’s advancement of the Federalism Accountability Act, and Senate passage of the Regulatory Right to Know Act, the Federal Financial Information Assistance Management Improvement Act, the Truth in Regulating Act, and revision of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
“Many of us who came to Washington carried a strong conviction about the wisdom of our constitutional federalism,” said Thompson. “This conviction gets tested frequently, but it’s worth fighting for. The diffusion of power and creative competition that spring from our federalism are fundamental to our democracy.
“Our challenge is to work together in a thoughtful and proactive way to help define the federal-state relationship in the Information Age,” added Thompson. “Both Congress and the Administration have an important role in restoring the balance, and I look forward to working with them and the states to do so.”
http://hsgac.senate.gov/030201_thompson_press.htm
January 12th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Did Thompson get his Federalism Accountability Act through the Senate?
January 12th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
“Fred was one of the author’s of the HOMELAND SECURITY ACT. That was his jurisdiction, not immigration.”
Whoa. Doesn’t everybody talk about how immigration is a SECURITY issue?
January 12th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Thompson, Akaka and Durbin Introduce Legislation to
Strengthen America’s National Security Workforce
Homeland Security Workforce Bill Provides Powerful Incentives for Federal Workers
December 5, 2001
Washington, DC – Governmental Affairs Committee Ranking Member Fred Thompson (R-TN) joined Senators Daniel Akaka (D-HI) and Richard Durbin (D-IL) today in introducing two bills detailing a comprehensive strategy to deal with both short and long-term deficiencies in the natural security workforce. The Homeland Security Federal Workforce Act and the Homeland Security Education Act seek to address specific problems in the federal government’s ability to recruit and retain national security professionals.
“We have to make sure federal agencies have the talent on hand to do the thousand daily tasks that don’t make the news but make us safer each and every day,” said Senator Thompson. “These bills help the federal government get – and keep – that talent.”
The Homeland Security Federal Workforce Act requires a strategic plan that assesses the status of the federal government’s national security workforce and requires the integration of performance plans for the national security workforce into plans required by the Government Performance and Results Act. In addition, the bill provides loan forgiveness, fellowships and employee exchange programs in support of the federal national security workforce. The Homeland Security Education Act strengthens federal support of educational programs — especially in math, science, and certain languages — deemed important to the national security workforce.
The bills are the product of many of the recommendations made by the Hart / Rudman Commission on National Security in the 21st Century released earlier this year. The Commission said in its most recent report, “The maintenance of American power in the world depends on the quality of U.S. government personnel, civil and military, at all levels. We must take immediate action in the personnel area to ensure that the United States can meet future challenges.
Senator Thompson added, “Employing the best possible federal workforce is a matter of national security. The federal government’s workforce crisis is real and will remain unless we begin to think strategically about what our needs are and then match our most skilled people with opportunities for development and incentives to stay.”
Experts have warned that the federal government faces immense challenges with its workforce, specifically citing the length of the hiring process, inability to retain employees, and an unprecedented increase in the percentage of retirements.
Summaries of the two bills are attached.
###
“Homeland Security Federal Workforce Act”
Title I: Expands the loan forgiveness program for federal employees in areas of national security. Allows Departments of Defense, State, Energy, and Justice as well as the Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the National Security Agency to repay up to $10,000 per year (up to a lifetime limit of $80,000) for individuals who have educational debt. In exchange, they enter into employment agreements for at least 3 years.
Title II: Creates fellowships for graduate students to enter federal service at national security-type agencies. The same agencies outlined in Title I above could offer fellowships to graduate students of mathematics, science, engineering, or a foreign language; in return for this assistance, recipients would agree to work for the sponsoring agency for a period of at least 3 years. There is a twenty percent set-aside of these fellowships for current federal employees.
Title III: Establishes the National Security Service Corps, which allows federal national security agencies to conduct exchange programs for mid-level employees. The Corps is envisioned to be a professionally rewarding opportunity that also has clear benefits for parent agencies. The National Security Service Board, consisting of representatives of the member agencies as well as the Office of Personnel Management, will outline the specifics of the Corps.
Title IV: Requires agencies to address human capital needs, particularly those that relate to national security, in their strategic plans, performance plans, and performance reports.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/120501press.htm
January 12th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
MWS,
It got through the senate, but not the house.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Some of Thompson’s inclusions in the Homeland Security Bill. Thompson was involved in the Immigration bill of 1996, but I don’t have the information in my archives.
I’ve gotta go. Go to this link to find some of my archives:
http://www.fredthompsonpresidency.blogspot.com/
· establish within the new Department an Office for National Laboratories, which will be responsible for the coordination and utilization of the Department of Energy national laboratories in a manner to create a networked laboratory system in support of the Department’s missions;
· allow the Department of Homeland Security to enter into joint sponsorship arrangements with one or more national laboratories in order to support homeland security research and development; and
· permit the Department of Homeland Security to directly fund and manage work carried out on its behalf by a national laboratory under a joint sponsorship arrangement.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
You know Tommy, any press office can produce lists of bills that an 8 year Senator put his name on, and I looks like Fred even wrote one or two Amendments in eight years. They can all talk about how vitally important their committee work was, and how their hard work goes unnoticed. I still haven’t seen where you’ve made a compelling case for Fred’s leadership in the Senate, or how he made significant changes for the better that would be proportional to a conservative’s 8 year career.
I’ll grant you that Fred was a pretty reliable conservative vote, except when it came to McCain/Feingold and tort reform, and I’m sure he did some things right. I just don’t see the type of leadership and “git ‘er done” record that I would expect in a President.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
Good night Tommy.
God bless.
January 13th, 2008 at 12:50 am
“I’m not a Huckabopper, but those tax hikes seem rather modest”
50% increase in tax burden in 10 years is modest?
Going from 30th to 13th among states in tax burden is modest?
Getting ranked 45th out of 50 by Cato on fiscal responsibility is modest?
This one tax hike ALONE … “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)” … was a 15% or so hike in the sales tax.
January 13th, 2008 at 12:58 am
why do my posts keep getting deleted? does someone not want gov. romney’s true record to be seen? go to http://www.trueromney.com before this post is deleted and check-out the facts!
-Paul
January 13th, 2008 at 8:41 am
This thread is information about how liberal Mike’s record is. Then MWS does a good job of deflecting attention by bringing up Fred. Then Paul tries to get an anti-romney sight in here. Mike is the king of deflection and it appears his supporters are learning the same tricks. I thought Tommy did a good job putting this together.
February 11th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
[...] Oliver at Race42008 responds, and this is just one excerpt from his [...]
November 18th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
[...] As I pointed out last January in this post: [...]