Fred! Amnesty

OK, Peach Pundit Fred Thompson backers…it ain’t gonna happen. He stayed in the race long enough to deny Huckabee a much needed South Carolina win, but I can’t imagine he’ll stay in after Florida, and he may drop out and try to throw his weight behind someone else before then in an effort to regain some of the credibility that he had and then watched erode as the race has gone on.

Consider this an open thread on Presidential politics. For all you Fred supporters, renounce now in the comments and we promise not to make fun of you for your prior bad judgement in the future. After all, it is kind of funny to think back on the glory days of Fredmania and note that Fred Thompson even had his own category here on PP.


  1. IndyInjun says:

    What I am loving is that Erick ridiculed Ron Paul, who since has raised about $25 million and today finished 2nd in Nevada. I accurately predicted before all the great fundraising that Dr. Paul would still be in the race long after Fred Thompson.

    Ron Paul has beaten Giuliani, Thompson, Tancredo, Hunter, McCain, and Huckabee in various states.

    His PRINCIPLES will be front and center in the coming months as the financial lunacy that the others promote comes crashing down.

    It has been very rewarding to watch the idiots on stage with him, shifting uncomfortably and looking at their feet every time Dr. Paul starts in on them about the financial lunacy that they front for.

    Ron Paul triumphing over Erick’s guy.

    Imagine that.

  2. I liked Fred the most and still do. His heart just didn’t seem in it until it was too late, though. Even if he doesn’t get out, I’m moving on.

    I like Mitt second best, but I’ll vote for the most viable candidate in Georgia against McCain (probably Huckabee, but I hope it’s Mitt). I won’t vote for McCain. I can’t stand the guy. His amnesty bill stabbed the GOP in the back and he is still a jerk about the issue to this day.

  3. Fred is a decent an honorable man, he looks much better today than the day he announced. I am really glad to see his health return. That is what worried me the most about his candidacy. Running nonstop around this massive country normally would take a serious toll on folks, but he fought the good fight.

    That’s what gets me about Giuliani. The man wants to be President, but doesn’t want to campaign in all the states. Doesn’t speak well for his sincerity with the race, a calculated gamble yes, sincere, no.

  4. IndyInjun says:


    Giuliani did not have the MONEY to run all over.

    BTW, Ron Paul has $8 million left and has raised $1.3 million since 1/1.

    The other guys have no money and cannot consistently win, because their support is weak and EVERYONE in the GOP hates their options.

  5. DoubleDawg3 says:

    I actually think Fred did much the same thing as Giuliani…I mean, he basically settled in in South Carolina once it became apparent that he couldn’t get enough support to win Iowa or New Hampshire since he got in so late. That’s the thing that killed me about Fred…he and his campaign just seemed to lack any energy and spirit. I was one of many that jumped on the Thompson bandwagon before he entered the race, but while I still agree with many of his positions on the issues I just couldn’t support someone that seemed to care very little about campaigning, about meeting voters and about trying to win the Presidency (rather than have it handed to him).

    Fred Thompson has some very good ideas, he’s thought out his positions and as of late he’s shown some spark in his public comments, but it’s all too little, too late. I’m hopeful he’ll leave the race now, as the large % of his voters will fall for McCain (whom I’m sure Fred will endorse once he does leave the race) or Huckabee…both of whom I prefer over Romney or Rudy.

    The big question now of course is Florida…most think McCain & Romeny will have the momentum now, but the fact remains that Rudy has been campaigning there for what seems like forever now. Add that to the fact that early voting and absentee voting has already been going on for a while in Florida, which seems as if it would benefit the one guy that’s been there virtually nonstop as of late (Rudy).

    If Rudy wins Florida, Super Tuesday is completely unpredictable. I’m guessing (guessing – only b/c I don’t know how much money McCain has left) that Romney will be the only one with the money to advertise in virtually every state. Personally, I think Super Tuesday will be completely split among the candidates.

    If Huckabee is smart, he’ll take what little $ he has and invest it all in attempting to win some combination of Georgia, ‘Bama, Tennessee, Arkansas (shouldn’t take too much money to win there, I’d hope),W. Virginia and possibly, Missouri (due to its proximity to Arkansas – it might be easier for him to get grassroots volunteers into Missouri). I don’t think he has the resources to win all of those, but I certainly know that he doesn’t have the resources to compete in anymore than 5 or 6 of the 20+ states voting that day. I think Huckabee’s biggest goal, in those states, should be to emphasize his committment to helping the average, “working-class” family. He’s going to do well enough among Christian voters in those states, but he needs to bring in voters that aren’t necessarily evangelicals. LIke Huckabee or not, his campaign is very much geared up to portray him as the “average guy” (which, for the most part I think he actually is – you know, as average as anyone who’s been a 10 year GOvernor can be — meaning, he’s certainly not poor, he’s certainly not devoid of “powerful” ties and connections, and I’m sure he’ll never have to actually do any real work any day for the rest of his life if he so chooses). I think he can connect with that, to voters in those states, but he needs to raise some cash to get that message out …and that feat (raising funds) didn’t get any easier by losing S. Carolina. Even if Huckabee could win some of those states, I think he’s only in the game now for the VP spot (which, if it’s behind McCain is no small matter…heaven forbid anything happen to McCain, but lets face it, he’s not getting any younger).

    For McCain, Romney and Guiliani (if he wins Florida or finishes 2nd), they can go after the “Big Fish” of California and New York, as well as Illinois and New Jersey. I’m assuming McCain has a solid grip on Arizona, as Mitt will have a solid grip on Mass. and Utah. Mitt seems to be doing well out west, so Montana, N. Dakota and Colorado might be wins for him (although I think McCain could and likely will challenge in any or all of those states). Rudy probably only has enough money (judging on the latest reports I’ve read) to invest in California, New York, Illinois and maybe some southern or northeastern states (Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware).

    Personally, I’m going to be rooting for a Guiliani win in Florida, so that the race continues to be as cloudy as ever and completely up for grabs.

  6. brohes says:

    I see this going several different ways for the GOP. There is a lot of support being given to various candidates that may or may not be the parties choice for ’08. This support may not show up at all in November:

    “But what do I know? I’m voting for Edwards.”

  7. souldrift says:

    Happy to see McCain win a second state, and happy to see TWO of the Three Stooges (both Giuliani and Thompson) take more lumps. Romney (the Third Stooge) finishing 4th in SC is good news too.

    Paul did well in Nevada, poorly in SC but still outperformed the Ghoul.

    If Huckabee or McCain or Paul win, I’d actually consider voting for a Republican were Hillary the Democratic nominee. I’m not the only one. But if you’d rather force me to vote for Hillary, push the Ghoul or Romney to the front.

    It’s your call.

  8. I can’t help getting a kick out of the irony of reading Chris posting about someone else’s bad judgment for supporting a candidate who might not win…

    (been on the winning side of any campaigns recently, Chris? in districts that don’t pre-ordain a democrat winning, i mean… )

    I am in Charleston tonight and attended both the Republican vote watching party (50 people) and the McCain victory party (800 people). (Fred T didn’t have an election night event in Charleston)

    The biggest observation I had in viewing the McCain event was my surprise at the huge number of attendees in the 20-30 age bracket. I’d bet half the crowd were in the 20-30 age group–something i’d have not assumed for McCain at 70+ years.

    McCain, as of Friday, leads in the most recent polls in Florida, Pennsylvania, California, and their staff tonight said that their internal polling shows them ahead in New York …

    I’ve not switched to anyone, though. These are just observations and items learned from tonight.

  9. DoubleDawg3 says:

    Interesting note that there were a lot of younger people at the McCain victory party in Charleston, considering that McCain did better among voters over 45, while Huckabee won voters under 45. Possibly, some of them were from the Citadel, or, maybe they were just volunteers (who either didn’t vote, or weren’t from S. Carolina …I know that the Huckabee camp had quite a few college students come from GA and N. Carolina over the past few days to volunteer).

    I suppose The younger crowd is more excited about having a reason to celebrate than the over 45 voters who were probably more excited to go home and go to bed at a reasonable hour!

  10. DoubleD! Good info. I haven’t seen any exit poll crosstabs tonight on which ages voted for which candidate. Interesting.

    But it was the largest young audience i’ve seen at a political event in awhile. And since the room was packed to the gills, I also noted that more than a few patrons smelled like bourbon. The beer had run out, The Citadel building was serving Jim Beam for a few bucks a drink. It reminded me of a Georgia Bulldog football game in the late 80s!

  11. GOPeach says:

    Maybe Fred and McCain had a little talk….

    “Gee what do we do now? …. Should you stay in, Fred and pull votes away from Huckabee OR should you drop out and endorse me?”

    I agree Chris – Fred is in now to take votes away from Huckabee… 3% was the spread. Fred needs to go home and get those little kids in the bed. Shame on him dragging those babies around like that… a man his age ought to know better!!!!

  12. Redcatcher says:

    Fred should have been the first to come out for the Fair Tax. At least he would have had a tax alternative that could be touted. Would he ever have gotten it passed? Probably not but it would have propelled him. Huck needs to use the FT more and attack his opponents with it. The GOP hopefuls need an issue that will stir the voters and right now I don’t see one.

  13. John Konop says:


    It is clear from exit polling that if Fred had not be in the race Huckabee would of won. Fred staying in the race in Florida helps McCain. And Fred did endorse McCain last time.

    It was clear Fred was going nowhere after NH with limited support or no money. It would be a stretch not to think Fred new he was helping his friend McCain by staying in SC.

    McCain also helps Huckabee against Romney. At the end since the GOP candidates cannot raise money (other than Ron Paul) Romney’s personal wealth gives him the advantage over McCain and Huckabee. Yet Huckabee does have a large grass root support that could surprise the establishment.

    The real question no matter which candidate wins can they win in a general election without Ron Paul supporters. Also does GOP have room for traditional conservatives anymore in the tent while keeping the NEOCONS happy?

  14. Romegaguy says:

    “If Fred hadnt been in the race, Huckabee would have won…” that’s almost like saying that if Congressman Price hadnt been in the race Konop would have been elected

  15. John Konop says:


    The exit polls do show if Fred was out of the race Huckabee would have won. Your tendency to say what you feel and not deal with facts does not change the truth.

  16. jm says:

    I’m looking at it from the other side of the fence. Most people aren’t as hard right or hard left as we think they are. They want a guy that will work over the fence. Clinton and McCain respect each other, and they shake hands over the fence. Thats how things get done, thats how it works when Congress actually works. The more polarized the parties get, the less gets done.

  17. rugby_fan says:


    Can you choose where to work? Where to live? What to do? What to believe? What to think? How to spend your money?

    Because unless something has changed from yesterday, there weren’t any real restrictions on my life.

  18. juliobarrios says:


    There are major restrictions on how you spend your money. First take the 40% – 50% you pay in taxes, so already 1/2 of your money you have no choice in; then add up all the restrictions, licenses, permits to do business, etc.. (as we as consumers are not receiving the choice and diversity in business we could due to government restrictions) and it’s very clear there is not as much choice as you might think when it comes to spending money. You’ve got to get a government license to cut hair for pete’s sake.

    Lots of limits when it comes to work as well when you think about permits, education requirements, regulatory boards and agencies, licenses, etc… Watch the John Stossel show on it – much easier to choose where you work in Hong Kong.

    So far we have free thought, although they are working hard against that in the government funded schools.

  19. juliobarrios says:

    I forgot to mention all the meddling are government does in trade through subsidies, embargoes, taxes, restrictions, etc…

    Not much choice in how you spend your money if you fell like going out and buying a good Cuban cigar.

  20. Josie says:

    “Because unless something has changed from yesterday, there weren’t any real restrictions on my life.”

    Well, I’m not free to marry anyone I choose…

  21. rugby_fan says:

    Wow Julio, too bad the most one could ever pay on income tax is 35%, but I guess I will let you hold on to that one for your argument’s sake.

    Your free thought and government schools reeks of paranoia, which is all that is.

    Much easier to choose where I work in Hong Kong? Quite possibly. That said, I can think of a few jobs that I would hope have some form of regulations on who can work in those fields. However, for I would say a good at least 75% of all jobs, I could get employment in that field, without government regulation. And no matter what, I can always choose my career path. I want to be a doctor, I go back to school. I want to be a line cook at McDonald’s I go and apply. The government is not assigning me a job.

    I’ll tell you something though about freedom. In Australia, New South Wales to be exact, depending on how one does on the School Certificate test, it determines what you will be able to sit for the Higher School Certificate. The state government, in conjunction with the federal government, evaluates your scores and then either assigns you to the standard HSC program or to the TAFE program, which is essentially a college for vocational studies. This program is implemented in similar fashions throughout the other states. So you have a government that actively evaluates students academic progress and decides what your future holds and there is no changing that, unless you have tremendous luck.

    So next time you start saying there is very little freedom in America, stop. There is no state religion, no government deciding what your career will be, no 50+ income tax rates, no genuine thought control, none of that. You can really cut the crap.

  22. IndyInjun says:

    Redcatcher –

    The Fair????tax will get anyone running on it blown out of the water. It is not a credible proposal.

    The voters finding out that it is a con job by which the corps get a $trillion in tax FORGIVENESS while Grandma gets a 30% new tax on nursing home care and Joe Blow gets a 30% tax on his employer-paid med insurance will tend to get them stirred up, just not in the manner you figured.

    Fred did take a close look at it and he was not sold.

  23. GodHatesTrash says:

    The GOP is the bottom-feeders’ party, and Hillbilly Fred and the Huckleberry have based their campaigns on appealing to the lowest of the low – the fundamnentalists, the gundamnentalists, the rebel rag wavers – the general southron kkkretin vote, the scum that voted for Maddox, Wallace, et. al. back in the good ol’ days…

    It’s good to see these morons fighting over the dregs – keep at it, Hillbilly Boy – you’re gonna die pretty soon, old man, might just as well do the country a great service by taking the Huckleberry off the table, too.

  24. Mark, have Republicans won any seats in Georgia lately that don’t have positive Republican performance? Of the open seats in the legislature this past cycle, we picked up Kevin Levitas (in what is basically a split district, maybe slight R lean) and Rick Crawford in what is very much not a split district (Perdue got 60%+ there both times).

    Georgia is a Republican state right now, and you guys (for the most part) do not lose the seats that you should win automatically. As for your newest client, I did a lot to help him get elected initially in 2004 (Kerry lost his district) before God took him off our hands and handed him to you.

  25. btpull says:


    Have you ever tried to calculate if you would be better off under a fair tax system? It isn’t as simple as stating a person would have to pay a 30% tax on X. You have to determine which system enables you to consume the most goods or services after adjusting for taxes.

    As far I can tell the groups that would benefit under a fair tax system are 1) young single people who pay a proportionately higher percentage of their income do to the fact they do not have large itemized deductions, child tax credits, and hit the higher tax rates at a lower level of income; 2) Mid aged preretirement people (i.e. empty nesters) would also benefit under the fair tax, since they have smaller mortgage interest deductions and do not have children related tax deductions or credits; 3) People who are high savers would benefit from a fair tax.

    The groups that would be worse off under a fair tax are 1) the young to middle aged families with high mortgage interest related deductions and child tax credits/deductions.; 2) Elderly and poor people that do not pay federal income taxes; 3) as well those who live-off investment income would be worse off.

    In my opinion the fair tax enables people to build wealth and encourages savings, which is why I support the fair tax more than I oppose it.

  26. SouthFultonGuy says:

    If we base the decision of dropping out or staying on what counts – that is delegate counts and we conclude Fred Thompson should drop out, so should Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani who both have fewer delegates than Fred:

    Romney – 72
    McCain – 38
    Huckabee – 29
    Thompson – 8
    Paul – 6
    Giuliani – 2
    Hunter – 1

  27. GOPeach says:


    Rudy may do well in South FL. with all the New York transplants but in Central and Northern FL –
    those folks are like South Georgia…. He won’t play well there.

    McCain’s win has awakened Huckabee’s base and NOW they know they have to ” help God” get him in by working harder!!!!!

  28. debbie0040 says:

    The exit polls showed that Thompson and Huckabee both had the support of conservatives. The Thompson voters would not have gone to Huckabee. I can tell you that many voters loved Thompson but did not think he could win and were supporting either Romney or McCain. We went door to door and made phone calls and not one person said they were torn between Thompson and Huckabee.

    That was assumed and is an incorrect assumption. I can tell you that most of the Thompson supporters will go to Romney and a few to McCain. Maybe you can count on 15-20% may go to the Huckster.

    I was upset Thompson lost but thrilled that Huckabee did not win as he had hoped.

    We now have to stop both Huckabee and McCain in Georgia and Alabama!!!

    debbie0040 // Jan 20, 2008 at 11:52 am

    I worked the past two week ends in Greenville, SC for Thompson. I can tell you that Thompson supporters would not have voted for Huckbee if Thompson were not in the race. They would mostly go to Romney and a few to McCain. Thompson voters vote for Thompson because they believe he is the most conservative.

    They are taken by by Huckabee’s overtly religious overtones in his campaign and his fiscal liberal record and his record on illegal immigration. Thompson’s supporters look more at record not rhetoric like Huckabee supporters do.

    Huckabee supporters were caught putting flyers on windshields on cars at Thompson’s Friday night rally. These flyers accused Thompson of being a baby killer. When they were caught putting out the flyers, they admitted they were Huckabee supporters. Then there were the push poll phone calls a group associated with Huckabee made..

    Did anyone hear that blurb on Fox News that the Huckabee campaign blamed McCain supporter Ralph Reed for some flyers put on care windshields about Mike Huckabee’s fiscal liberalism?

    Many Thompson supporters from all over the US were here in Greenville helping out Thompson. We watched the returns together and all cheered very loudly and applauded when it was realized that Huckabee had lost.

    The fact Huckabee is saying that had Thompson not been in, he would have won South Carolina is ridiculous.

    Huckabee can not appeal to voters outside of the evangelicals and that is not enough to win. Huckabee had to win South Carolina in order to have a chance to win. Huckabee could not win a state where 60% of the voters are evangelicals. McCain got 26% of the evangelical vote. Huckabee got something like 56%. The difference between Iowa and South Carolina is that a lot of evangelicals in South Carolina look at both record and rhetoric.

    Thompson is the best choice for President but has proven not to be the best candidate..

    I think that ultimately the race will come down to Romney and McCain….

  29. debbie0040 says:

    Peach has it ever dawned on you that God is not supporting the Huckster? I can’t believe you now say that God is supporting any candidate especially Huckabee. I did not know that God supported liars…

  30. Debbie, that is absolute lunacy, completely… It is the most insane drivel. Under that premise, then Thompson must be on God’s really bad list and Ron Paul even worse. Hmmm, what the heck did Duncan Hunter do that was so bad???

    Good grief.

  31. John Konop says:



    ….Thompson’s presence in the South Carolina primary hurt Huckabee’s chances, said his senior adviser and fellow Arkansas Republican, former U.S. Senator Tim Hutchinson. Both candidates competed for the support of evangelical voters.

    “He peeled away too many votes from us,” Hutchinson said. “We just couldn’t overcome that.”….

    From Rasmussen Report

    McCain’s lead grew as Fred Thompson chipped away at Huckabee’s support. …

    The facts are the facts Debbie.

  32. debbie0040 says:

    Excuse me Maurice, I was responding to Peach that said , “McCain’s win has awakened Huckabee’s base and NOW they know they have to ” help God” get him in by working harder!!!!!”

    She inferred that God was supporting Huckabee and that is ridiculous to infer that God is supporting anyone.. That is insane drivel!!

    Funny how you don’t ever say a word of complaint about Peach’s postings…

  33. debbie0040 says:

    Those polls assumed that since Huckabee and Thompson were drawing from the same pool of conservative voters, they would vote for Huckabee if Thompson were not in.

    I don’t believe that. I think they would go to Romney or McCain. Just look at the percentage of conservative votes McCain got. That was suprising.

    In going door to door some voters said they liked Fred but did not think he could win. They were torn between Fred and either Romney or McCain but not one said Huckabee. Look at the percentage of conservative vote McCain took..

  34. IndyInjun says:


    I don’t think any analysis of being “better off’ under the FT is really practical or even possible for a lot of reasons.

    First, the FT applies to costs that are exploding a LOT faster than wages. Second, it is a tax on catastrophes (accidents, injuries, fires, etc.) that cannot be predicted. Third, a LOT of folks won’t have jobs after the FT as any services that can be offshore and online will be, entertainment and other ‘optional’ consumption will wither when folks are confronted with 30% rates on necessities, and the sheer complexity of the existing system makes i very difficult to analyze.

    The numbers behind the FT don’t work.

    This whole mess is coming to a head in the next five years and SPENDING MUST BE CUT.

    After we get a grip on SPENDING, either the flat or fair taxes work.

    I am not in favor of a blanket exemption for Biz, something that the sales taxes of the states and the VAT taxes of Europe do not have.

    Anyone older than 50 does not benefit from the FT IMHO.

    I am a very disciplined saver and I know that tax accountants would prosper under the FT.

    The “Fair”????tax is not as advertised and I say this as someone with a quarter century of sales tax experience.

  35. Romegaguy says:

    Gee Yahoo quotes Huckabee’s supporter Tim Hutchinson and his sour grapes and then Konop believes it is a fact. John you wouldnt know a fact if it farted in your face.

  36. albert says:

    I would know it if someone farted in my face. Of course if it was a silent killer it may take a few minutes but I know I would know it.

  37. IndyInjun says:

    Look for Romney to take control of the POTUS race.

    All of his spinning makes him the only candidate enough GOPers can accept enough to emerge victorious.

    Moderates can win. Fringe candidates – all of the rest are fringe candidates – cannot.

    I won’t vote for him, but my vote for the GOP was gone long ago. Only Ron Paul’s candidacy keep me on board.

    As Noonan, Buckley, Viguerie, Gold, and Will have written – the GOP must die and be reborn. Only Paul was reason for a stay of execution.

  38. IndyInjun says:


    You are right, but there are whole constellations of numbers that DO work within the Income tax universe – like several $trillion in Muni bonds.

    One supposes the FT is a nice flight of fancy, but that is all it is, short of throwing out the entire financial system and beginning anew.

    Even Huckabee is given to talking about his tinkering with the income tax system. He likes to ensnare supporters with the FT con, though.

  39. souldrift says:

    “The less that gets done the more free we remain. And we really do not have that much freedom left.”

    SugarHill, that’s the reason I am for someone who transcends the current mindless partisanship: The less that gets done, the more people DIE as we saw in Katrina. (all levels, clearly not just Federal but not exclusive of Federal)

    Obama ’08.

  40. Romegaguy says:

    Give us a link to that blog you write John that nobody reads…. and also tell us about how you almost got elected to Congress

  41. John Konop says:


    Hutchinson gave an opinion that matched a poll from Rasmussen. I did know that I had to help you put the two concepts together. I am sorry. I thought you could process information beyond a talking point. If you need further help I will do my best to help you.

    As far as the constant personal attacks against me by you really do not bother me, I just consider the source.

  42. Ian says:


    Economic dislocations are THE problem with an INCOME tax system that is highly manipulable – subject to influence by lobbyists and continual revision by politicians, taxes business resources and payroll whose costs can NOT be extracted from export prices and results in higher domestic “price tags” for consumers.

    Clearly, the answer is in front of us – the FAIRTAX ( ); that’s right, the same plan ardently advocated by Gov. Huckabee ( ) and demagogued by people like Bruce Bartlett ( ) – and you, of course.

    The research makes a compelling case for EVERYONE to get involved in voicing their support for the FairTax Act of 2007 (HR 25 / S 1025) that’s been reintroduced into every session of Congress since 1999, and with growing numbers of co-sponsors ( ). Mr. Huckabee’s advocacy of the FairTax ( ) is the single most important policy position in this election. Here’s why:

    The FairTax rate of 23 percent on a total taxable consumption base of $11.244 trillion will generate $2.586 trillion dollars – $358 billion more than the taxes it replaces ( ). [BHKPT]

    The FairTax has the broadest base and the lowest rate of any single-rate tax reform plan ( ). [THBP]

    Real wages are 10.3 percent, 9.5 percent, and 9.2 percent higher in years 1, 10, and 25, respectively than would otherwise be the case ( ). [THBNP]

    The economy as measured by GDP is 2.4 percent higher in the first year and 11.3 percent higher by the 10th year than it would otherwise be ( ). [ALM]

    Consumption benefits ( ) [ALM]:

    • Disposable personal income is higher than if the current tax system remains in place: 1.7 percent in year 1, 8.7 percent in year 5, and 11.8 percent in year 10.

    • Consumption increases by 2.4 percent more in the first year, which grows to 11.7 percent more by the tenth year than it would be if the current system were to remain in place.

    • The increase in consumption is fueled by the 1.7 percent increase in disposable (after-tax) personal income that accompanies the rise in incomes from capital and labor once the FairTax is enacted.

    • By the 10th year, consumption increases by 11.7 percent over what it would be if the current tax system remained in place, and disposable income is up by 11.8 percent.

    Over time, the FairTax benefits all income groups. Of 42 household types (classified by income, marital status, age), all have lower average remaining lifetime tax rates under the FairTax than they would experience under the current tax system ( ). [KR]

    Implementing the FairTax at a 23 percent rate gives the poorest members of the generation born in 1990 a 13.5 percent improvement in economic well-being; their middle class and rich contemporaries experience a 5 percent and 2 percent improvement, respectively ( ). [JK]

    Based on standard measures of tax burden, the FairTax is more progressive than the individual income tax, payroll tax, and the corporate income tax ( ). [THBPN]

    Charitable giving increases by $2.1 billion (about 1 percent) in the first year over what it would be if the current system remained in place, by 2.4 percent in year 10, and by 5 percent in year 20 ( ). [THPDB]

    On average, states could cut their sales tax rates by more than half, or 3.2 percentage points from 5.4 to 2.2 percent, if they conformed their state sales tax bases to the FairTax base ( ). [TBJ]

    The FairTax provides the equivalent of a supercharged mortgage interest deduction, reducing the true cost of buying a home by 19 percent ( ). [WM]

    ALERT: Kotlikoff refutes Bruce Bartlett’s shabby critiques of the FairTax ( ).

  43. ReaganRepublican says:

    McCain/ Huckabee ticket would be unbeatble. Better than Reagan /Bush:
    International affairs=McCain
    Fiscal conservative= Fair Tax (huck)
    social conservative=Huckabee

    The perfect unbeatable coalition……. The Reagan GOP is back…

  44. juliobarrios says:

    It worries me to think there are people out there who believe the federal income tax is the only tax we pay, but it would explain a lot as far as the complacency of the citizenry when it comes to getting raped by the taxman.

    My 50% of our income/freedom we pay in taxes was a conservative estimate. Just off the top of my head in addition to the federal income tax I can think of state income tax, sales tax, property tax, ad valorem tax, payroll tax (both employer and employee), embedded taxes (see employer payroll tax for one example), and extra taxes for alcohol; cigarettes; and gas (which also affects are choices), other excise taxes, and unfunded mandates (could definitely make the argument it’s a tax since the government is requiring you to spend money). Just thought of these quickly, I’m sure some economists could come up with many more.

    I don’t think the argument was about comparing the USA to other countries who have even less choice then us, I think it was if we simply have a choice over how we spend our money and our lives. When the Government takes the biggest chunk of the fruits of our labor, I’d say we don’t have a lot of choice over our lives.

    Americans love to talk about freedom and choice, but the fact is most have no idea what freedom is. If you were to actually define it to most it would scare the hell out of them – no safety nets, no helping you make choices through regulation of virtually every aspect of our lives from banking, fishing, hunting and stocks to healthcare, food prep, pets and hair salons.

    Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t have a problem with some regulation, but at least I’m honest with myself and accept the fact I’m giving up freedom and choices in exchange for the “safety”.

  45. TPSoCal says:

    If Fred drops out, I am going with my second choice McCain. I don’t like any of them except Fred. In fact, I still may vote for Fred as a “I don’t like ANY of the others!” vote.

  46. TPSoCal says:

    I have to ask a serious question as an outsider of PP. Is GOPeach real? No insult intended, she is just so “enthusiastic”.

  47. Brian Laurens says:

    Fred stays in as long as he helps McCain. Hopefully Thompson supporters realize this now and will leave this tool before it is too late. This includes you Chip.

  48. GOPeach says:

    Agreed Brian.

    Fred can ACT like a president all day long but I have a message for Freddy T.

    Time to leave the “set” and stop reading the cue cards from Washington!

  49. Philly says:

    Whoaa!!!! The McCain Train caused the Huckabus to wreck!!

    What do you Huckabee supporters have to say about that!! You bragged about how well Huckabee would do.

    Fred Thompson had a better showing than I expected him to. He should stay in and accumulate delegates. He would make a great Vice President!!

    Huckabee is dead and just has not realized it yet. I would hope John McCain would be intelligent enough not to put Huckabee on as VP. Fred Thompson and Sen. DeMint would make a good VP’s. Sen. McCain needs a VP with a strong anti illegal immigration record.

  50. GOPeach says:
  51. rugby_fan says:


    You still miss the point. These freedoms you are giving up is part of a social contract. I won’t bother to sum up 400 years of political philosophy but, essentially, you have no freedom if there is not some form of regulation on your life.

    But besides all that, tell me one instance in the last week, where you said in your everyday life choices, you wanted to do something but you couldn’t because of the government. Be honest with yourself and don’t be so paranoid.

  52. jsm says:

    If Fred drops out, I am going with my second choice McCain. I don’t like any of them except Fred. In fact, I still may vote for Fred as a “I don’t like ANY of the others!” vote.

    I’m with you SoCal. I vote my conscience and beliefs, no matter what. I seem to be drawn to candidates with the right positions but bad campaigning skills. I call it the ‘Mac Collins Syndrome.’

  53. Jace Walden says:

    That’s just the thing, GOPeach. How am I supposed to keep the real Sabbath day holy if its the only day that I can buy beer before nanny government cuts me off for the week?

  54. debbie0040 says:

    Peach, Fred has never made the statement that wives need to be in subjection to their husbands like Huckabee has…

  55. debbie0040 says:

    It was a comment Huckabee made a few years ago about wives being in subjection to their husbands as the Bible directs. A reporter asked him about it and he refused to go back on what he said. It happend about the same time as the AIDS quarantine comment

  56. IndyInjun says:

    Rome – The SC voters seem to havetorpedoed the Huckaship as he is at 13% in Florida and sinking fast.

  57. Holly says:

    Oh, then he was quoting Ephesians 6. Though it is not what today’s “feel good” society wants to hear, that book of the Bible lays out a pretty clear picture of how to properly love.

    There are a lot of things to legitimately hit Huckabee on. Referring to scripture, no matter how “inconvenient” the verse is to our current culture, isn’t something I’d attack him on. . . but that’s just me.

  58. debbie0040 says:

    I was responding to this from GOPEAch and just pointing out fact.

    “Fred CLEARLY sees WOMEN as LESS than men.

    Hillary would eat him for breakfast, lunch, and dinner!”

  59. ReaganRepublican says:

    Debbie, please do not support McCain/Huckabee, You are a jinx, you always pick loosers. That goes for you too Laurens/waterboy……… Stick to your magical underwear wearing freak………..

  60. ConservativeCaucus says:

    Debbie, come on now – please tell me that you understand that passage of the Bible – and that his opponents are trying to score political points over something, if properly understood, is well within the mainstream of popular thought:

    Marriage is not a 50-50 deal, but rather we are submitting to each other as husband and wife… this is about the man and the woman loving each other the way God intended. If you want to join the elite media and try to demagouge the issue, feel free to, I am just a little disappointed.

    Huckabee’s response to a silly question:

  61. debbie0040 says:

    Huckabee can not win in November. He can not attract non evangelical support. He only gets 40% of evangelical support. It is because of statements he has made like this and ammending the Constitution. Huckabee is using religion to get votes and many people resent that. Huckabee is someone you either love or hate. He is polarizing.

    The Bible also says that husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church. Funny how men just seem to forget about that scripture and just quote the subjection one.

  62. Jace Walden says:

    GOPGirl and JSM:

    There is hope for the both of you. Now that Fred is dead, there is only one clear conservative choice hands down:

    Remember why you supported Fred. You may have a litany of reasons, but I’d be willing to bet the underlying reason was because he represented a conservative alternative to McCain, Romney, Giuliani, and Huckabee. Fortunately for you, there is still a conservative alternative in the race:

  63. jsm says:

    Jace, I support our presence in Iraq and the work that is being done there. I also do not agree with Paul regarding our relationship with Israel. These are fundamental issues on which I cannot give in.

  64. shep1975 says:

    And Debbie, McCain, Romney and Rudy cannot attract significant support from Evangelicals. Apparently you can’t win with them, you can’t win without them.

    They walked in 1998 and 2006 and look what happened. I guess we can just plan on saying “good morning” to President Clinton come Jan. 22.

  65. ConservativeCaucus says:

    Debbie, thank you for making my point – Gov. Huckabee correctly said that the passage is about husbands and wives loving each other, not about someone being more important than the other.

  66. debbie0040 says:

    And with Huckabee as the nominee the fiscal conservatives would have walked… Huckabee can not attract outside of the evangelicals and he does garner all their support.

  67. GOPeach says:


    You are sooo wrong about HUCKABEE!
    You are really clueless!

    His base is SOLID and they will not cave.
    He knows NOT to compromise and flip them off.

    Bishop Mitt will not have our base.
    Beltway McCain is out of touch.

    Huckabee is the BEST CHOICE :

    Check this out:

    The Rev. Bill Owens, leader of the Coalition of African American Pastors, cited Huckabee’s strong track record as governor of Arkansas in promoting blacks to board posts and embracing racial reconciliation.

    McCain nor Romney will get the BLACK VOTE!

  68. GOPeach says:

    A host of Christian leaders including Janet Folger, president of Faith2Action, Rick Scarborough, founder and president of Vision America, the Rev. Don Wildmon, founder of the American Family Association and Tim and Beverly LaHaye, he the veteran activist the founder of Concerned Women for America are supporting former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.

  69. GOPeach says:

    Debbie said:

    ” Huckabee can not attract outside of the evangelicals and he does garner all their support.”

    ONCE AGAIN – Debbie is WRONG!!!!

    The NEA has endorsed HUCKABEE… THIS IS HUGE!!!!!! Sara Huckabee ( the Governor’s Daughter) worked with the AK DOE and helped make that happen for him!

    HUCKABEE appeals to a BROAD BASE!

  70. IndyInjun says:

    This election is showing a disastrous schism between fiscal conservatives and the holy rollers. There are a few candidates who can heal the rift, but unfortunately they are not in the race.

    The holy rollers and neocons have run the GOP and the country into financial oblivion to the point that it would take a miracle of the loaves and fishes several million fold over to make the available money meet $80 trillion in obligations.

    At the moment GOP idiot-appointee Bernanke is performing this ‘miracle’ with a more than a few more zeroes onto the money supply added out of thin air.

    Taxabee could not pull off such a miracle in Arkansas without a huge tax increase, but then he had no printing press, unlike the disastrous George W. Bush.

    Vote Democratic in November. It is important.

  71. debbie0040 says:

    Peach, you are behind the times. I mentioned a long time ago that the Huckster was endorsed by the NEA. Shows that Huckabee is a RINO

  72. debbie0040 says:

    Peach, If what you say is true about the Huckster, then what happened in South Carolina? What is happening in Florida?

  73. Jace Walden says:


    So…you would rather support a politician who pumps tons of money and support to Israel, but basically pisses on his own country?

    Because that’s what you’re going to get from Romney, McCain, Huckabee, Thompson (oh wait) Guiliani, Clinton, and Obama.

    I’m curious about when Israel became more important to Republicans than the United States.

  74. jsm says:

    Come on, Jace. Going a little too far, aren’t we?

    No conservative puts Israel ahead of the US, but he understands that we need Israel to be our ally in the irrational world of the middle east.

  75. Jace Walden says:

    I don’t think we’re going too far at all. Ron Paul hasn’t advocated abandoning Israel. In fact, he’s called out the other so-called “supporters” of Israel. If we support Israel, then why do we sell weapons to enemies of Israel?

  76. Jace Walden says:

    Hell, Pat Buchanan was called an anti-semite by the Republican establishment because he didn’t want to base our foreign policy on Israel.

    Our foreign policy should be based on our own rational self-intrests first. The government’s job is to its own people. Not the people of another country.

  77. Icarus says:

    I don’t consider Ron Paul an anti-semite because of his support (or lack thereof) of Israel.

    I consider Ron Paul an anti-semite for the years of comments he published in his newsletter that were both bigoted as well as anti-semetic.

    I also consider Ron Paul to be anti-semetic for his refusal to denouce the various hate groups that were a large part of his early core supporters in his presidential race.

  78. IndyInjun says:

    Dr. Paul is not all that big on denouncing folks, but he denounces bad ideas.

    In every debate, he challenges the RECORD of the others versus what the GOP stands for.

    When he speaks on the financial mess they all champion, it has been fun to see the others look down and uncomfortably shuffle their feet.

    Jace, I figure you were all of 9 or 10 years old when Buchanan was so smeared. I was 40 and I will never forget it. It is one reason none of these absurd attacks on Ron Paul have caught me by surprise.

    The nation has been destroyed financially by the GOP impostors and their enablers.

    That is one thing they cannot pin on you, I, or Ron Paul.

  79. Holly says:

    The nation has been destroyed financially by the GOP impostors and their enablers.

    No, that started in the 1930s when government, though well-meaning, became the “solution.” But I think it’s fair to say the past 8 years have not done anything to reverse this notion. Quite the opposite.

  80. Bill Simon says:


    You forgot the obvious group who LOVES the FairTax: the super-duper rich who have already purchased just about every hard good they can purchase, they are settled into their “house for life” and never have to worry again about any really big ticket items to buy. (Read: Neal Boortz and John Linder), while everyone else NOT in that wealth-earning range DOES have to worry about paying a hefty federal sales tax on every large-ticket item they buy.

    Those are the facts. Next time you present an argument, don’t neglect the factual details.

  81. Doug Deal says:


    I used to be a big supporter of the NRST, and I think it is objectively better than the current system. If we were starting from scratch, it would be the way to go.

    However, the fact is that we have had the current horrible system for decades, and introducing the NRST would be like giving a spine transplant to a 90 year old cancer patient.

    The work is horribly complicated and the patient is in a state and probably would not survive the surgery.

    So, like you, I oppose the plan, and instead want tax simplification, and perhaps a flat tax constitutional amendment. If then we want to operate on a healthy patient and introduce the NRST, so be it.

  82. IndyInjun says:


    While I agree that the path to socialism began in the 1930’s, the GOP is the party that has destroyed the USA financially. 70% of the debt was incurred under the last 3 GOP presidents and Nixon disastrously took the US off of the gold standard. Spending on social programs is up 70% under GWB.

    The GOP is not longer the lesser of two evils, but just plain evil.

    The action in my life of which I am most ashamed is ever voting for George W. Bush, the worst POTUS in history.

Comments are closed.