Perrspectives: Top 10 Moments in Mike Huckabee's Extremism

Well golly

I'm halfway there then. I just finished my first semester.        

---

Claim to fame: Posted first PHB diary to be demoted

---

by: cindik @ Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 23:18:59 PM CST

A Very Huckabee Christmas

Surely nothing says Merry Christmas like coordinating stripes and elbow patches for the men and blue jeans all around.  

-from a prior year's Huckabee card. 

---

by: Pollyanna @ Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 23:45:23 PM CST

Oh

my...

Pam,
J'aime ma Peau

---

by: Blonde Pam @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 08:03:04 AM CST

[ Parent ]

and there may be controversy regarding Huck's weight loss as well

Did Mike Huckabee Have Bariatric Surgery?

Mike Huckabee claims to have lost his weight via good old-fashioned diet and exercise. And I suppose it's not impossible that he did. But folks, I've lost 50 pounds more times than I can remember, and I can tell you that it's incredibly hard work, and that eventually, the weight comes back. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery, on the other hand, may not make you healthy -- indeed, it may kill you -- but it will make you thin.

Blogger Plutarch has a pretty devastating rundown of the many pieces of evidence that Mike Huckabee had gastric bypass surgery. The whole piece should be read in full, but this is the part I want to highlight: 

Details on Huckabee's diet are found in the numerous human-interest stories his weight loss spawned. He does not eat at banquets and receptions. At events, he will have special food supplied for him from a cooler kept in his car or does not finish his meals. He eats six small meals per day. Avoidance of restaurant-type banquet meals is telling because such meals create difficulties for bariatric surgery patients. These diet peculiarities bear little resemblance to maintence [sic] of weight loss, but tally quite well with characteristic bariatric limitations.

Those of you who have gone through Roux-en-Y, or looked carefully into the procedure, know this tracks exactly with what they tell you meals will be like. Too much food at one time, especially sugars, can create "dumping syndrome," causing hypoglycemic symptoms. Or it can cause vomiting, because, well, if the food can't go down fast enough, it's got to go somewhere. Were Huckabee in the long-term maintenance phase of weight-loss, a banquet wouldn't be an insurmountable hurdle. And he wouldn't be eating six meals a day. He seems very much the model of a successful gastric bypass patient. He even had the post-op hernia surgery.

 

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 14:50:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Weight loss surgery

Do you know if anyone has asked Huckabee directly about these allegations?

---

by: Pollyanna @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 15:16:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Somewhat direct

The post that Pam linked to indicates he has denied the allegations at least three times.

---

by: txrad @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 15:42:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

or just diabetic?

some diabetics help control their condition by eating frequent meals tha have been very carefully balanced.  he may just be run of the mill diabetic, but hiding it.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 16:24:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Diabetes

Huckabee touts the story that he was diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes, and that this was a major impetus for him to change his eating and exercise habits.  Apparently, both of his parents suffered from one or the other forms of the disease.  He claims that his doctors tell him tests show this disease process has been reversed for him now.

---

by: Pollyanna @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 17:04:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I guess Ian...

...doesn't like to exchange facts about diabetes, because he down-rated my comment, even thought it gives the benefit of the doubt to his favored candidate.  Ian, why don't you like fact-based discussion about how some diabetics manage their health?  

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 23:39:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, this does sound like a bariatric eating pattern.

---

by: NancyP @ Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 17:08:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh Dear

That's a family that needs to lay off the pies.

ALLY (ALLIE) (transitive) To connect or form a relation between by similitude, resemblance, friendship, or love.

---

by: Vicster @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 00:49:18 AM CST

Maybe Huck should be running for...

...president of Jenny Craig.

---

by: raj @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 11:36:07 AM CST

Badda Boom

Very funny line, raj, but I feel kinda guilty for laughing at it.  Sort of.  A little.

Anyway, not knowing much about his past weight issues, I Googled Huckabee weight and read the first two articles that popped up - both from the Washington Post.  I recommend them to others.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52897-2004Aug9.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/16/AR2006011601380.html

I find it very hard to be other than impressed with the opinions he espouses on weight and health, at least from a nutritional and public health standpoint.  And so far, anyway, the Huckster has walked the walk.  He seems to have sought help, become enlightened on an issue which affected him personally, changed his destructive behaviors, and continues to be receptive to views on obesity and public health policy which are more enlightened than those he previously held.  Quite the uplifting story most of us probably can get behind.

Is it possible he might yet see the light on matters of importance to the LGBT community?  I'm not that big a dummy so I won't be holding my breath.  However, those so inclined could always pray on it, I guess.

---

by: Pollyanna @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 14:31:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

They Can Relate

This photo may reveal Huckabee’s appeal to the voters. By having sired two morbidly obese sons, Huckabee has become someone a large portion of our nation can identify with.

Remember how some folks said in the ’80s that they voted for Reagan precisely because his lack of intelligence made him more representative of our country? Well, now the public has obesity and sell-satisfied ignorance to admire.

---

by: Jim @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 12:54:00 PM CST

i guess

he dropped out of seminary school before he got to the part about "thou shalt not lie"...

---

by: nexyjo @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 13:00:59 PM CST

Cloning?

Just see what the uncontrolled mixing of genes in oficially sanctioned Het Marriages can lead to.  

---

by: West Texas @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 13:30:56 PM CST

FairTax

http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Fai...

      "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither"

Thomas Jefferson

"The mob is the mother of tyrants"

Diogenes

---

by: Markpat @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 18:14:15 PM CST

Eek!

Oh please oh please oh please oh please, do not let this man get elected president! I shiver at the very notion of it. His rise in the polls sort of makes me a tad queasy, like a gulp of spoiled milk, or maybe it's more likely a giant case of stupid has taken over of the Republican base ... again.

www.landofsavages.com

---

by: 777.shane @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 18:57:21 PM CST

FairTax - BETTER Today, BEST Tomorrow

Economist Dale Jorgensen, Harvard University, was commissioned to find out what portion of current prices were represented by costs for complying with the federal income tax code (i.e., embedded tax costs). He concluded that 22% (average) of every retail dollar, spent by consumers, constituted a price-embedded tax. Thus, in addition to individual income tax and FICA withholding, individuals are unwittingly paying these unseen, embedded business tax costs with every purchase of a new product, or service.

Under FairTax, prices would fall, due to removal of embedded business tax-related  costs. Concurrently, wages may rise due to a mix of factors, including reversion of withheld pay (or some portion thereof) to employees, advancement opportunities due to business expansion resulting from retained earnings, and/or increased demand for labor accompanying increased competition (from that expansion). Where profits (or wages) appear lucrative, competition will move into the market space, driving out excesses (immediately present after FairTax is enacted), arriving at new "market-adjusted" prices.

For FairTax to constitute 23% of new transaction cost (i.e., "market-adjusted" price plus FairTax), a mark-up of 29.9% (tax exclusive rate) on the new "market-adjusted" price is necessary. (Before balking, consider what we're paying now if income tax rates are converted to tax-exclusive sales tax rates on net income instead of percentage of gross income. The following figures can be compared to the 29.9% FairTax mark-up: Fifteen pct bracket = 17.6%, twenty-five pct bracket = 33.3%, twenty-eight pct bracket = 38.9% (! really), and thirty-five pct bracket = 53.8% (! that's how bad it is).

In order to make FairTax a progressive consumption tax (such as that recently called for by Warren Buffett), all citizen-families are simply sent a monthly consumption [tax] allowance, called a "prebate."  This prebate is intended to reimburse taxes on necessities for every citizen family without need for record-keeping or reporting. Moreover, the direct payment bypasses the creation of a tax code specifying exempted products and services around which a lobbyist industry could grow. The amount is variable, based on family size, and is equal to the FairTax rate on poverty-level spending, as defined by the Dept. of Commerce. At present, a family of one would receive ~$200/month, a family of four, ~$500/month. Thus, the "effective" FairTax rate paid by citizens, will never equal the full 23%. Of course, U.S. visitors (legal, and illegal) will pay the full FairTax when they purchase anything new, at retail (used are not taxed again). Under FairTax, working families will have their whole paychecks (minus any state or local income tax withholding) plus their monthly family prebate.

Additionally, citizens will no longer have to spend the average 50 hours per year preparing their federal tax returns. Having more monthly income may result in using credit less, and saving more. Larger savings will make it easier to purchase a home, at a lower interest rate and monthly payment. (Thus, mortgage deductions are no longer applicable when income is not the basis for taxation).

But is FairTax actually "fairer"? To provide substantive answers, Prof.'s Kotlikoff and Rapson (10/06) have concluded,

"...the FairTax imposes much lower average taxes on working-age households than does the current system. The FairTax broadens the tax base from what is now primarily a system of labor income taxation to a system that taxes, albeit indirectly, both labor income and existing wealth. By including existing wealth in the effective tax base, much of which is owned by rich and middle-class elderly households, the FairTax is able to tax labor income at a lower effective rate and, thereby, lower the average lifetime tax rates facing working-age Americans.

"Consider, as an example, a single household age 30 earning $50,000. The household's average tax rate under the current system is 21.1 percent. It's 13.5 percent under the FairTax. Since the FairTax would preserve the purchasing power of Social Security benefits and also provide a tax rebate, older low-income workers who will live primarily or exclusively on Social Security would be better off. As an example, the average remaining lifetime tax rate for an age 60 married couple with $20,000 of earnings falls from its current value of 7.2 percent to -11.0 percent under the FairTax. As another example, compare the current 24.0 percent remaining lifetime average tax rate of a married age 45 couple with $100,000 in earnings to the 14.7 percent rate that arises under the FairTax."

Further, per Jokischa and Kotlikoff (2005) ...

"...once one moves to generations postdating the baby boomers there are positive welfare gains for all income groups in each cohort. Under a 23 percent FairTax policy, the poorest members of the generation born in 1990 enjoy a 13.5 percent welfare gain. Their middle-class and rich contemporaries experience 5 and 2 percent welfare gains, respectively. The welfare gains are largest for future generations. Take the cohort born in 2030. The poorest members of this cohort enjoy a huge 26 percent improvement in their well-being. For middle class members of this birth group, there's a 12 percent welfare gain. And for the richest members of the group, the gain is 5 percent."

The current income-based tax system is also more expensive to run, because of the manner in which the tax code is gamed by politicians and lobbyists. Politicians realize great power, and attract constituencies for support, by granting tax favors (i.e., credits, deductions, exemptions) through lobbyists. Fully, fifty-three percent of Washington lobbyists are there because of the tax code! The tax code is continually changing, making it more complex - more difficult to understand. And, the salaries and costs of tax lawyers and lobbyists end up in higher prices of the products and services we buy. Additionally, the time and money required to keep records, file returns, report for audits, retain accounting and legal help, pay IRS penalties and interest, is time and money lost for other productive, or recreational, activities. Depriving us of the use of withheld wages increases our expenses through zero-interest withholding, inflation, return preparation time, and interest paid on credit cards and loans that otherwise may not have been necessary. Summed up, the cost of tax compliance, nationally, has been estimated to range anywhere from $265 billion to twice that amount, depending on the extent to which tax-avoidance consultation is sought and utilized. These expenses constitute a substantial hidden tax which is incomprehensible to the average working American. And the FairTax gets rid of all of it for most Americans, and most of it for business owners.

We, as FairTax advocates, believe that government should serve We, the People, with a fair tax system that will not enable politicians to pit poor against rich (creating barriers to achieve wealth, adding tax penalty to the sacrifices made for personal success). Nor do we want politicians to continue using business as a tool to hide taxes from consumers, often villifying business, which discourages entrepreneuship, personal achievement, economic growth. Liberty and happiness depends on restoring the fruits of labor to those who produce them. We believe that the tax function should align with economic growth, not against it, that government should be paid for in the same manner as working Americans - when, and because, something is sold!

As things stand at present, the system primarily benefits politicans who cater to special interests through lobbyists who game the tax code. The politician seeks to capture them as constituent voting blocks, dependent on continued syphoning of taxpayer dollars to their members' benefit. This is increasingly repugnant to the average working American who often finds it difficult to meet the needs of his, or her, own family in an environment where federal and state business income taxes substantially contribute to trade inequities resulting in the loss of American jobs! Thus, the Sovereign are continually degraded by features of Congress's income tax policy. The most rapidly-growing needs-based "special interest" group has become the Citizens! You see? Congress has nearly all the power; and We, the People, have become We, the Serfs, robbed and enslaved. Getting the federal government's hands out of our family paychecks is the single most important reason to replace the income tax with a consumption tax, the FairTax.

Many of us have joined FairTax.org in order to build a national movement to free ourselves, our family pocketbooks, and our businesses from confiscation of income, and punishment of  productivity. And this we say to our federal representatives,

"Either scrap the code and enact the FairTax, or we intend on replacing you with someone who will."

(May reproduce in whole or part. - Ian)

---

by: Ian_from_Ann_Arbor @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 22:54:13 PM CST

welcome, Ian.

I gave you a zero rating without even reading your very long (and doubtless very thoughtful) post, because you gave mine and many others low ratings for no apparent reason.  as a new user, if you want to make a positive impression and get people to spend time reading your thoughts, best not to down-rate everyone during your first moments on the blog.  just some friendly advice.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 23:36:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's spam.

We don't seem to have the option of flagging it as such, maybe "troll" will have to do for this too?

My America includes LGBT families.

---

by: Mena @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 23:38:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

troll = spam

in my book.  go for it.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 23:40:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Done!

My America includes LGBT families.

---

by: Mena @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 23:42:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Ian, I am impressed by your ability to

cut and paste large amounts of copy.  Meanwhile, I recommend that you try:

---

by: Pollyanna @ Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 23:59:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]