The man who challenged me to a debate on Governor Huckabee’s foreign policy credentials three days ago, has responded to my critique 
via J. Martin at politco:
To make matters worse, as Huckabee’s challenges have grown more intense of late, he has lost the aide he brought on to handle his rapid-response and research operation.
Joe Carter, who took a leave from the Family Research Council to move down to the former Arkansas governor’s campaign headquarters in Little Rock, has returned to Washington, leaving a key position unfilled in the crucial final days before the caucuses.
Well, the man couldn’t handle my knowledge! 
In all seriousness, Carter’s a good man and I seriously doubt our little debate had anything to do with it.
Nobody could’ve paid him enough for that job. I had no wish to be in his shoes. So, with Huckabee’s research director gone, it seems Huckabee went into meltdown today. He jumped into something that he thought would win, but you can’t build a strong organization from scratch, and Huckabee hasn’t responded to the pressure of the spotlight. Huckabee has inspired a lot of good people, but as is the case, when you put your faith into something that hasn’t been tested or scrutinized at such a late event…
I have a lot more to say on this that will be included in a much longer piece I mentioned earlier that I hope to finish tonight before I go out.
I wish Joe Carter nothing but the best.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Remember, Tommy, the universe can’t exist without you, man…………………….
December 31st, 2007 at 8:31 pm
In the end, if we woke up to Mike Huckabee as the nominee, I think we would over time scratch our heads and wonder what went wrong and how the party managed to put someone in who would be like the Republican party’s John Kerry.
Mitt has worked long and hard in Iowa, done countless events there, put some serious time and money and organization there. He has also demonstrated himself to be a capable leader and committed to conservative principles. It’s all these factors combined that I think will lead to a Mitt victory in Iowa in the end, because Huck just hasn’t had the kind of scrutiny Mitt has.
Now that the election is so close, I think Iowans might realize they can’t afford to risk voting for someone who might ultimately disappoint the party.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:32 pm
he has has responded?
that isn’t somekind of double positive?
December 31st, 2007 at 8:32 pm
Mitt has money.
God bless him.
How dare anybody challenge him and all his virtous millions.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:33 pm
Sour grapes again, Peter?
December 31st, 2007 at 8:35 pm
Oooooooh I forgot.
How dare anybody challenge him—-AND WIN.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:37 pm
I’m still really concerned over the prospect of a candidate “buying” the nomination. That’ how Mitt Romney’s campaign strikes me. I believe he has the best chance, statistically at this point, of clinching the delegates – but how he does it still concerns me. That said, if he is the nominee I would fully support him.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:41 pm
Huckabee makes $25000 an hour for giving speeches. Even if your irrational logic of “poor candidate=good president” were true, Huckabee is hardly poor. Huckabee is imploding under the pressure.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:47 pm
Hey guys, rumors are that the Huckabee folks are going to be might pleased by the DeMoines Register poll tonight.
I think it will show him with a comfortable lead among likely caucas goers.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:47 pm
MJ, all the candidates are running ads. Why do you believe Romney is buying the nomination? Is it because he has started earlier, or because he has raised so much, or because it has increased his polling so much?
December 31st, 2007 at 8:47 pm
Romney has money because we gave it to him. He has raised more money than any other candidate. Every time you mention that Romney has money as if that were negative, you simply highlight that not enough people support Huckabee to give him money.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Greg,
Where did you hear that?
December 31st, 2007 at 8:49 pm
Mitt has the money – alot of it personal – to go the long haul. That can go a long way towards offsetting any actual or perceived holes in a candidate. In the end, in a close race for sure, the dollars will make the difference – that’s what concerns me. For the record I am not a Huckabee supporter.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:50 pm
“Hey guys, rumors are that the Huckabee folks are going to be might pleased by the DeMoines Register poll tonight. ”
Lets hope not.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Greg, we’ll know in an hour. I expect Romney to beat Huckabee by ~5% Thursday. I’d actually be surprised if Huckabee pulled out a win.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Chris,
My understanding is that Romney has alot of personal wealth invested in the campaign – in addition to contributions. Please correct me if I’m wrong – that’s what I’ve seen and read.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:52 pm
One of the Huckabee blogs has their administrator saying that he had an early peek, and Huckabee was leading comfortably. I do not know what that means (5-6%?). They were pretty giddy about it.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:52 pm
MJ,
“I’m still really concerned over the prospect of a candidate “buying†the nomination. That’ how Mitt Romney’s campaign strikes me.”
I call it the Lie and Buy strategy. It is the “traditional” way of campaigning.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:53 pm
MJ – True that Mitt had some money to work with, but you have to admit, he has been fighting all the candidates and the media for a long time. He was too conservative on all fronts for the media, and was perceived as the one that would be toughest for the democrats to beat in the general, regardless of what early polls show. The other candidates had their own agendas which caused them to have to try hard to find a way to beat him in Iowa, and a different guy for NH.
The fact is, that nobody else could have withstood this kind of scrutiny for this long a time. Like my analogy of last night, its been like one guy taking on 9 + the media in a tug a war, and after 12 months, it would be nice if somebody would step up and say, “Wow, that guy is one strong son of a gun”. So don’t throw this money garbage at me. The other guys have all had the thing handed to them on a golden platter, and none of them had the ability to hold on to it.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:54 pm
Yes, remember that Romney has spent most of what he has raised, being offset by his own personal funds to the campaign. He spent the money that people gave him, but he can afford it.
That’s the argument for those who think he’s buying it off.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:57 pm
Greg,
“Hey guys, rumors are that the Huckabee folks are going to be might pleased by the DeMoines Register poll tonight.
I think it will show him with a comfortable lead among likely caucas goers.”
Which would explain why Huckabee (I think) sincerely pulled his negative ads today. Sure, he still tried to get mileage out of them, but I think they got wind of the poll and decided they didn’t need to go “Romney” on Romney.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:57 pm
Saying Romney is buying the election is rather insulting to the voters. Buying an election means bribing people, paying off officials, and utilizing other illegal and questionable methods to win. Please show me even one instance of Romney doing that. Romney has raised a ton of money from supporters while also using some of his own personal finances (which he earned legally as a very successful businessman) to run a professional and so far successful presidential campaign. That’s not buying an election. It’s a campaign. John Kerry was rightly criticized for NOT spending all available funds on his run for the presidency. Thompson is being accused this time around of not fighting hard enough for the job. Ironically, Romney gets attacked for spending too much money and fighting too hard for the job.
Tell me, oh wise supporters and campaign manager wanna-bes of the other candidates, how much money has your candidate received but decided it’s better not to spend for fear of the appearance of “buying” the election? How many TV commercials has your candidate decided wasn’t important to air because he didn’t want to be seen publically too much? How many campaign appearances did your candidate cancel because he’s been to enough of them and doesn’t want to overdo it? How many grass roots supporters did your candidate tell “no that’s ok, we don’t really need your help.” because he didn’t want to be seen as fighting too hard for the nomination?
December 31st, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Illinois,
I see your point. It’s true, for example, that McCain was rolling in the dough early on last year and burned through it all.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:59 pm
Sadly, MWS, that may be the reason. It would be a big turnaround from the Mason-Dixon poll from the other day, but the tide turns every couple of days. Huckabee’s fiasco of today may still haunt him beyond the new poll.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:00 pm
Is the poll released now, or in another hour?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:00 pm
Alaska,
“Saying Romney is buying the election is rather insulting to the voters. ”
Funny how the guy who spends the most almost always wins. Sure it’s not outright bribery, but the guy with the money gets the buy the rights to creating the storyline. He buys the rights to write the narrative.
I guarantee you if Huck had Romney’s money, and Romney had Huck’s money, we’d be discussing Romney about as much as we do John Cox right now.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:01 pm
Actually, the Iowa press has apparently turned on Huckabee over this, from the reports I’m reading. Mitt looks to be the winner in IA now, barring disaster.
However, this is being referred to as “The Dean Scream” by everyone in the media. This is getting hammered hard. It has thrown everything into complete disarray and the race for 2nd could be wide open.
Huckabee seriously miscalculated in this move… and remember, Romney and Thompson lead in 2nd choice in the campaign in Iowa.
I’d be willing to go as far that it could knock huck into a distant second, or he drop way down. We won’t know until it’s over, but if huckabee seriously hurt himself, it throws the south back into play for you know who…
December 31st, 2007 at 9:03 pm
Greg,
“Huckabee’s fiasco of today may still haunt him beyond the new poll.”
Nah. It’s a tempest in a teapot. The self important media always wants to be in the middle of the drama and be the focal point of the climax. Since they were an integral part of this story, they are making it a big deal. Of course the Huck haters will try to make any little thing the media says negative about Huck into the biggest campaign event there ever was.
And the voters will yawn.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:04 pm
Now you know what it’s like when not only the conservatives turn on you, but when the MSM tries to define you. They’ll twist your motivations and quotes to make you look terrible. Welcome to our world.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:05 pm
MWS. . .You’re logic escapes me. Perhaps the guy with the most money is also getting the larger share of donations from millions of supporters. Perhaps he has a better message which attracts more people. Perhaps he has a better campaign strategy and gets more campaign bang for his donated buck. Campaign funds don’t just appear out of thin air. No one held a gun to the heads of those who donated money and said “Give to Romney and not Huck or I’ll blow your brains out.” It’s a poor argument at best and disingenuous sour grapes at worst to say that a candidate is buying an election simply because he’s spending more money.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:05 pm
Tommy,
Keep dreaming.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:05 pm
MWS, I don’t think it will hurt him with the evangelical base, but beyond that base, some will wonder if he is the right buy to be in the oval office. Can you really see the future president of the U.S. doing this? I don’t know how large the effect will be, but if the press labels him as a loser, it will discourage some of his troops from getting out for the vote.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:06 pm
Was it 9pm EST pr CST?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:06 pm
MWS,
No offense, but has it occured to you that Romney has raised so much more than Huckabee because a lot more people are willing to contribute to Romney than to Huckabee? Romney’s personal contributions to his own campaign were just around 20% of his total, he would still dwarf Huckabee even without them.
All this nonsense about Romney bribing the electorate is really just sour grapes from a candidate who can’t convince people to support his campaign.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:06 pm
Alaska,
Are you suggesting that the best fundraiser is by definition the best candidate?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:07 pm
MWS. . .Not at all. I’m also not suggesting that the best fundraiser is not the best candidate, or came to receive those funds illegally or unethically, or doesn’t deserve those funds.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:09 pm
MWS,
Also, how long are you going to accuse Romney of lying on Huck’s record without backing up your claim? Got anything?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:09 pm
MWS,
You think the wheels aren’t falling off? Seriously? You want me to start posting the news reports? I wouldn’t question me there…
Then he goes on to have protesters arrested??? What’s this?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:09 pm
#22 – alaska jake – exactly! I have never contributed $$ to anyone’s campaign – even when I volunteered to GOTV in 2004 for Bush.
But for Romney, I have a monthly contribution set up with my credit for him. It’s not much, because I don’t have much, but I have never contributed $ before.
Romney is worth it.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:11 pm
Actually, Romney and Huckabee’s charges both passed the smell test at factcheck
December 31st, 2007 at 9:12 pm
“That sound you hear rumbling out of Des Moines appears to be a monumental implosion”
-Time Magazine
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2007/12/huckabust.html
December 31st, 2007 at 9:13 pm
Murphy,
“Also, how long are you going to accuse Romney of lying on Huck’s record without backing up your claim? Got anything?”
Romney was not “tougher” on meth than Huck. The punishment for meth under Huck was 4x higher than it was under Mitt. Only a politician could say that making an absurdly weak law slightly less absurdly weak is being “tougher” than the guy who signs a law 4x tougher than your own.
Romney raised taxes. “Fees” are one of the terms liberals use as a euphemism for “tax.”
Both are NOT “pro-life.”
December 31st, 2007 at 9:15 pm
I’m praying that this DMR poll isn’t as bad as Greg is saying it is. This is probably the last or second-to-last IA poll before the Caucus – this was the one where Romney needed to make the really strong showing so he could boost moral and make him look like the likely winner.
Enough of the expectations thing…Romney needs to win this.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:15 pm
MJ,
“I’m still really concerned over the prospect of a candidate “buying†the nomination. That’ how Mitt Romney’s campaign strikes me.”
MJ, even if you remove the money that Mitt has donated personally to the campaign, he has still out raised all the other Republican candidates at $44.8 million, or with his own money, $62 million. People give to candidates they like and Huckabee has raised only a paltry $2.3 million.
So even though Mitt has been willing to contribute his own money, he has done an excellent job of raising money from people willing to support his candidacy and has completely outdone Huckabee in this regard.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:17 pm
No matter what the case, the Des Moines Register poll is already out of date no matter what it says.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:18 pm
In other news, I like being redundant.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:18 pm
“Romney was not “tougher†on meth than Huck. The punishment for meth under Huck was 4x higher than it was under Mitt. Only a politician could say that making an absurdly weak law slightly less absurdly weak is being “tougher†than the guy who signs a law 4x tougher than your own.”
Romney pushed for higher sentences – Huckabee cut them. Arkansas had tougher laws than Mass, but Huckabee was not stronger than Mitt. try again.
–
“Romney raised taxes. “Fees†are one of the terms liberals use as a euphemism for “tax.—
A fee is a charge for a particular service. A tax is a run-of-the-mill charge for no particular thing.
–
“Both are NOT “pro-life.—
How is Romney not pro-life?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:18 pm
Thomas Alan is correct…
December 31st, 2007 at 9:20 pm
A fee is also cherged to the user of the desired service. A tax hits everyone whether they use the service or not. I’m ok with the first option.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Romney was also going to turn one of the best (if not *the* best) state schools in Massachusetts into a privately funded institution, under which category it would not have been able to remain affordable for the vast majority of the people who have attended it, myself included.
The Massachusetts Maritime Academy is the oldest and finest maritime academy in the country, operating continuously since 1891. It’s graduates have fought in every US war since that time. In fact, the entire Class of 1942 was killed in the Battle for the Atlantic.
Mitt Romney, however, said that “Massachusetts doesn’t have a Navy; it doesn’t need a maritime academy”.
Is this the man we want for Commander-in-Chief?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:28 pm
I’m going to be sick in the stomach if that poll has Huck up more than 5%. We can handle 5%, cause this idiot thing he pulled to day will be that much.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:29 pm
Looks like those loaves in fishes are disappearing Mike.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Patrick: One man’s veal is another man’s pork. Sounds like Mitt was working on trimming the fat from the Massachusetts budget. I thought conservatives were in favor of this.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:31 pm
“Is this the man we want for Commander-in-Chief?”
I’m not convinced its relevent. How would that apply to anything he would do as CiC?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:32 pm
Jason, wait for the Huckabee camp to respond that they are being “crucified” in the media and will rise from the dead 3 days later.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:35 pm
52 Maybe, it’s because he forgot his scripture and said Jesus was just a boy when he did that.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Patrick,
Wow, Romney wanted to privatize a state funded institution. What other damnable offenses do you have lined up?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:36 pm
#55, LOL!!!
December 31st, 2007 at 9:39 pm
53,
Not at the expense of national defense. The US Merchant Marine is already the smallest and most underfunded it’s been since the 1930s. How do you think the tanks and troops get to foreign shores? I’ve got news for you: they don’t get airlifted. How do you think the US Navy keeps itself supplied? Active-duty naval officers don’t man tankers and cargo ships. Civilian mariners and naval reservists like me do. How do you think we can maintain an overseas presence at all? It comes from American seapower. Most people think of the Navy and the Navy only when they think “seapower”, the Navy is critical. But the US *could not* operate far from our shores without our merchant fleet. And the backbone of that effort comes from academies like the one that Romney wanted to cripple. I won’t say he wanted to “shut it down” because that’s disingenuous. He simply wanted to yank its funding and let it wither on the vine. The federal military academies operate exclusively with federal funding: their students don’t pay a dime. I had to pay, but only a fraction of what I would have if Romney’s plan had come to pass.
There are only six such schools in the country, graduating less than 1000 officers a year between all of them. Mass Maritime is the 2nd largest, contributing about a quarter of that number. In one stroke of the pen, Romney wanted to drive 1/4 of our ability to field a merchant marine out of business.
This is just one of the reasons why I will never, ever vote for Mitt Romney again. I did once, and I learned my lesson.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:39 pm
I just watched that Huck-a-been’s press conference video again with my husband. He couldn’t believe it. He just shook his head and said “that is completely transparent”.
The second time around, it hit me how ludicrous he was speaking out both sides of his mouth almost simultaneously.
If that isn’t his Howard Dean moment, he must not be capable of having one?
I cannot wait to see the video Redstate Update comes up with on this one. They’re going to have a riot with this one. Easy to do.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:39 pm
MWS:
“I guarantee you if Huck had Romney’s money, and Romney had Huck’s money, we’d be discussing Romney about as much as we do John Cox right now.”
Well, then why doesn’t Huck raise money of his own? Again, even if you don’t include any money Mitt has personally given to his campaign, MITT STILL OUT RAISED HUCKABEE BY ABOUT 20 to 1. Why is that MWS?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:40 pm
57,
So you’re in favor of privatizing national defense?
What a great idea! Seems to me the Romans did the same thing in about the year 250. How did things work out for them again….?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:41 pm
MWS #42,
I gotta be quicker around here. Several people (#47, #49) already said it all with regards to your claim of Romney misrepresenting Huckabee’s record.
Patrick #50,
Your point on the MMA has been addressed several times over the last few months. I know it’s a chip on your shoulder and all, but join the club and get a student loan for cryin out loud!
December 31st, 2007 at 9:42 pm
63,
I had several student loans, thank you. My father wasn’t rich. I had to work my way to where I am now.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:42 pm
Patrick. . .
I can’t speak towards the Mass Maritime Academy specifically (a fine institution, I knew people there when I lived in MA years ago). However, in general terms, obviously the military situation here and abroad has changed, a great deal in recent years. The military base reallignment several years ago is a perfect example of an unpopular and imperfect plan put into effect due to financial and strategic needs. If Romney as governor discovered during the course of trimming the state goverenment that a state funded institution was no longer necessary or was costing more than it’s value (value in financial terms, not in terms of admiration for the Academy) or who’s services could be better performed by other state or federal offices, then it may make more sense to “reallign” rather than continue paying for a once necessary but now unneeded institution.
When the Defense Dept undertook the reallignment process it impacted the states in ways never seen before. I know in Mass and all New England it hit hard due to all the naval and other bases there. While it impacted directly in terms of lost tax revenue and unemployment in town where the closed bases once stood, it also gave the states a reason to examine it’s own military complexes in relation to the rest of the country.
It sounds to me like your beef should be with the feds and the Defense Department. They should be funding the Merchant Marines. State like Mass and just a few others should not be shouldering the costs for a national military branch.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:44 pm
You know, out of curiosity, why did Romney decide against the plan to privatize the institution?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:44 pm
And no, it hasn’t been properly addressed, at least not by the Romney camp. You come back with “trimming the fat” or some such platitude.
The Democrats did the same thing in the 1920s and 30s saying that we didn’t need a large army or navy (or merchant marine). Not once have you convinced me that Romney would be a better commander-in-chief than my preferred candidate.
How does Romney expect to win a war when he doesn’t understand basic logistics?
December 31st, 2007 at 9:45 pm
65,
Thanks, that’s the most coherent response I’ve gotten from a Romney guy since HeavyM and I had this discussion. I disagree with you, but I appreciate the fact that you’re at least addressing the issue.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:46 pm
Patrick,
Congrats on having student loans. Let me play my little violin.
No offense, but I have a remarkably hard time digging up more sympathy for someone who’s major gripe is that a Governor tried to gradually privatize their state college.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:46 pm
For all interested, here is the link to the Huckster’s infamous “negative attack” video the he decided not to run just before showing it to all the press.
Enjoy…
December 31st, 2007 at 9:48 pm
69,
I have many more issues than that with Romney. Like I said, I voted for him once. I never intended to go to war with the ever-present pro-Romney lynch mob tonight, but I get pretty aggravated listening to you guys talk about Romney like he’s the second coming. He’s far from it. And from a “consumer” who “bought” the Romney package, let me tell you: what’s written on the box is not what you get.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:52 pm
Patrick. . . Alaska is a big military state too, and here in Anchorage with Ft Richardson Army Base and Elmendorf Air Force Base, we live and die with the military. So I know where you’re coming from. Having said all that, I should add that while we disagree on our choice of candidates, I do admire and thank you for your military service. I think whoever wins this race will and must confront the dire need to do more for veterens (including the VA and its hospitals) and soldiers alike.
December 31st, 2007 at 9:53 pm
#71
Upset that he turned out more conservative than advertised?
December 31st, 2007 at 10:00 pm
73,
No, it’s not about that. It’s about keeping your word and being able to see the big picture. I think Mitt Romney is an incredibly intelligent, ambitious, and talented man. He’s obviously done very well for himself, and can run anything from a small business to the Olympics. I’ve said before in his defense that he is an unbelievably talented manager. But that’s just it: a “manager”. I don’t think he’s an incredibly talented leader.
I will even go so far as to say that I think we’d be much better off today if Romney had been president the last eight years instead of Bush. But I don’t think he’s the best choice now. Romney would make a pretty good peace-time president, hell, he’d probably be an excellent peace-time president.
But I can’t vote for him in war-time.
December 31st, 2007 at 10:01 pm
I like how Huckabee accuses Romney of being dishonest in the same commercial where Huckabee levels some dishonest attacks at Romney’s record.
Huckabee accuses Romney of raising taxes by over $700 million. False. Romney raised fees (not a tax hike) by $260 million, closed corporate tax loopholes (not a tax hike) for $140 million, and passed NUMEROUS tax cuts. Here’s the list of tax cuts:
CAPITAL GAINS TAXES: Governor Romney Turned The Legislature’s $250 Million Retroactive Capital Gains Tax Increase Into A $250 Million Tax Refund. (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The Conservative Political Action Conference, Washington, D.C., 3/2/07)
INVESTMENT TAX CREDIT: Governor Romney Signed An Economic Stimulus Package Making The Investment Tax Credit (ITC) Permanent. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Signs Economic Stimulus, Supplemental Budget Bills,” Press Release, 11/26/03)
PROPERTY TAX RELIEF: Governor Romney Proposed And Signed Legislation Providing Property Tax Relief To Senior Citizens, Enabling Them To Keep Their Homes. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Signs Bill To Give Seniors Tax Relief,” Press Release, 11/20/05)
2004 SALES TAX HOLIDAY: Governor Romney Enacted The State’s First-Ever Sales Tax Holiday In 2004. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Promotes Tax-Free Shopping Day On Saturday,” Press Release, 8/14/04)
2005 SALES TAX HOLIDAY: Governor Romney Enacted A Second Sales Tax Holiday. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney, Dimasi, Hart Promote Tax-Free Shopping Weekend,” Press Release, 8/14/0)
BIOTECH MANUFACTURING JOBS TAX REBATE: Governor Romney Proposed And Enacted A Tax Rebate For Manufacturing Jobs Created In The Biotechnology, Life Sciences And Medical Device Fields. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Signs Economic Stimulus, Supplemental Budget Bills,” Press Release, 11/26/03)
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT TAX CREDIT: Governor Romney Proposed And Enacted An Expansion Of The Research And Development Tax Credit. (Jay Fitzgerald, “Gov Nearly Halves Package; Rebellious Legislators Vow To Override Stimulus Vetoes,” The Boston Herald, 11/27/03)
LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT: Governor Romney Extended The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. (Jessica Fargen, “Romney Pegs Courthouses For Repair Money,” The Patriot Ledger, 8/11/04)
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS TAX RELIEF: Governor Romney Ended The Prescription Drug Tax Which Fell Disproportionately On Seniors. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Signs No New Tax Budget In Time For New Fiscal Year,” Press Release, 6/30/03)
COMMUTER TAX RELIEF: Governor Romney Signed Legislation Allowing Commuters To Deduct Transportation Costs From Their Income Taxes. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Governor Romney Signs $25.2 Billion FY 2007 State Budget,” Press Release, 7/8/06)
VETERANS TAX RELIEF: Governor Romney Signed Legislation Providing Disabled Massachusetts Veterans With Extensive Tax Exemptions. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Expands Tax Benefits For Disabled Veterans,” Press Release, 8/14/06)
HOME HEATING OIL DEDUCTION/ENERGY EFFICIENT CREDIT: Governor Romney Signed Legislation Giving Homeowners A Deduction Of Up To $800 For Home Heating Costs And Providing A One-Time Credit For Homeowners Who Purchase Energy Efficient Heating Products. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Signs Legislation To Provide Energy Price Relief And Increase Conservation,” Press Release, 11/22/05)
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT: Governor Romney Proposed And Enacted A Refundable Tax Credit To Promote Development At The Former Fort Devens U.S. Army Base. (Stephen Heuser, “$660M Drug Plant, 550 Jobs For Mass.,” The Boston Globe, 6/2/06)
FIRE SAFETY TAX DEDUCTION: Governor Romney Proposed And Enacted A Tax Deduction For Businesses Installing Automatic Sprinkler Systems To Enhance Fire Safety. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Signs Into Law Landmark Fire Safety Legislation,” Press Release, 8/17/04)
CONFORMITY TO FEDERAL INCOME TAX CODE: Under Governor Romney, Massachusetts Was Brought Into Conformity With The Federal Code, Providing Massachusetts Taxpayers With A Range Of Credits, Exemptions and Deductions Previously Unavailable To Them. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Urges Taxpayers To File For New Tax Breaks,” Press Release, 1/24/06)
MEDICAL DEVICE TAX CREDIT: Governor Romney Enacted Legislation Providing A Tax Credit For User Fees Paid By Medical Device Manufacturers to The U.S. Food And Drug Administration. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Expands Tax Benefits For Disabled Veterans,” Press Release, 8/14/06)
MOTION PICTURE TAX CREDIT: Governor Romney Signed Legislation Providing Tax Incentives For Movie And Television Production In Massachusetts. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “‘Lights, Camera, Action!’ In Massachusetts,” Press Release, 11/23/05)
BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT TAX CREDIT EXTENTION: Governor Romney Signed Legislation Extending The Tax Credit For Brownfield Site Redevelopment. (“Campaign Notes,” The Berkshire Eagle, 7/8/06)
HISTORIC REHABILITATION TAX CREDIT: Under Governor Romney, The Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit Was Created Which Provides A Tax Credit For The Renovation Of Historic Buildings. (The General Court Of The Commonwealth Of Massachusetts, Chapter 141 Of The Acts Of 2003, “An Act Relative To Investments In Emerging Technologies To Promote Job Creation, Economic Stability And Competitiveness In The Massachusetts Economy”)
December 31st, 2007 at 10:13 pm
What is GOTV? Sorry to interrupt the conversation.
December 31st, 2007 at 10:16 pm
Get Out The Vote. Basically, its the “ground game”.
December 31st, 2007 at 11:25 pm
75: So Mitt helped to complicate the tax code in order to benefit special interest groups?
Now if that’s not leadership, who knows what it could be called…
January 1st, 2008 at 1:15 am
MarkG #78: So Mitt helped to complicate the tax code in order to benefit special interest groups?
Are you even a conservative?
Look at those tax breaks. Capital gains. Investment taxes. Property taxes. Sales taxes. Manufacturing taxes. Low income housing taxes. Prescription drugs taxes. The list goes on, and Romney cut them all.
And you whine about it complicating the tax code?
January 1st, 2008 at 3:48 am
#11 Chris, #44 Emtee:
It is not correct that Romney raised more money from other people than any other Republican candidate. The most recent reports that have been released were from the quarter ended Sept. 30, so they’re a little out of date, but as of that date Rudy Giuliani had raised $44.7 million from other people, while Mitt had raised $44.4 million from other people. It’s a minimal lead for Rudy, but it’s still a lead.
Unfortunately, we won’t get the next FEC reports until Jan. 31 for the 2007 year end report, but the fact is that Rudy is, as of the last report, the leading Republican candidate in terms of raising money from other people. Mitt has the overall financial advantage, but that comes from his self-financing of $17 million.
January 2nd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
#80 your wrong
Guliani only outraises Romney if he counts the money he raised for the General election Romney did not raise any for the General Election so the numbers are misleading. if you cout primary dollars raised to primary dollars Romney out raised Guliani.
January 2nd, 2008 at 7:58 pm
In case you haven’t seen it yet, Joe has posted about his so-called leaving of the Huckabee campaign. It turns out he was given a thirty-day leave from the FRC for the sake of helping the Huckabee campaign during that time. So he hasn’t really left the campaign. It’s just that he’s got to go back to earning an income at his actual employer. He’s still with the campaign (and if they open a D.C. office he’ll be officially part of it). So this all sounds like a mountain out of a molehill. There’s no story here.