Who's paying for ads attacking Mike Huckabee?
The not-so-mysterious case of the coy candidate: Who's paying for those ads attacking Mike Huckabee? Everybody in Arkansas seems to know -- except Huckabee.
by Michael Scherer: As political whodunits go, it was a remarkably easy case to crack. In late August, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee went on Fox News Sunday to ask a nation of amateur sleuths for help. A conservative low-tax group, the Club for Growth, had just spent $85,000 on a television attack ad in Iowa, accusing the former Arkansas governor of "raising taxes like there was no tomorrow" . . . . Huckabee, who claims to be a fiscal conservative in the tradition of Ronald Reagan, said he just didn't know who was behind the attacks. . . .
The Huckabee challenge -- solve the Case of the Huck Attack -- sounded at first like a real grade-A mystery. But under the surface, something was afoot. . . . In the case of Huckabee, the national television challenge amounted to little more than a red herring to throw voters off the scent. The real culprit of the attack ads lay . . . in the backwater squabbles of Arkansas Republican politics. In fact, . . . the political chattering class in Arkansas was already well aware of the probable culprit behind the Club for Growth's decision to run costly advertisements against Huckabee. . . . The ads had been paid for by a spin-off group called Club for Growth.net, which files regular disclosures through the Internal Revenue Service. A quick review of those filings showed . . . a Little Rock neighbor and political rival of Huckabee's named Jackson T. "Steve" Stephens Jr. had given the group $125,000, including a $50,000 check just days before the 2006 election when it was too late to spend more on that election. A member of one of Arkansas' richest families, Stephens also serves as chairman of Club for Growth.net, along with his Arkansas business associate, Gary Faulkner. . . . The battle between Huckabee and Stephens dates back a decade and focuses mostly on their disagreements over the best fiscal policy for the state and the local Republican Party. Huckabee governed as a fiscal moderate; while he cut taxes, he also raised taxes . . . Stephens never made any secret of his displeasure at Huckabee's actions. In 2002, Huckabee decided to oppose a voter initiative to eliminate the state sales tax on groceries and medicine, an effort that Stephens was helping to fund.
. . . In fact, the Case of the Huck Attack was so easy to solve that it presented a second mystery -- the Case of the Coy Candidate. Why was Huckabee going on national television claiming not to know what everyone else knew about his old political foe in Arkansas? And what business did he have impugning the reputations of his rival candidates by suggesting that they were surreptitiously, if not illegally, using a third party to smear him?
In a conference call with reporters . . . Huckabee again repeated his claim that he did not know who was behind the campaign, an information deficit that would make him unique in Arkansas political circles. "I hope he is not involved in the Club for Growth stuff," Huckabee said about Stephens. "I would be disappointed and I would be wondering why." . . . Huckabee boasted of pushing through a state education reform initiative that Stephens supported and enacting other reforms from an advisory panel on which Stephens served. He also mentioned that both Stephens' brother and cousin were supporters of the Huckabee for President campaign. "He ought to love me," Huckabee said. The betting money believes Huckabee knows full well that he is searching for love in all the wrong places. But given the choice of responding to an attack ad and demonizing its backers on national television, Huckabee made the politically prudent choice. He would rather make a mystery out of the obvious. Rather than get bogged down in a discussion of his mixed record as a fiscal conservative in Arkansas, . . . [Full Article]
Tags: Arkansas, Club for Growth, Election 2008, Mike Huckabee, Politics, presidential candidate, Republican
by Michael Scherer: As political whodunits go, it was a remarkably easy case to crack. In late August, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee went on Fox News Sunday to ask a nation of amateur sleuths for help. A conservative low-tax group, the Club for Growth, had just spent $85,000 on a television attack ad in Iowa, accusing the former Arkansas governor of "raising taxes like there was no tomorrow" . . . . Huckabee, who claims to be a fiscal conservative in the tradition of Ronald Reagan, said he just didn't know who was behind the attacks. . . .
The Huckabee challenge -- solve the Case of the Huck Attack -- sounded at first like a real grade-A mystery. But under the surface, something was afoot. . . . In the case of Huckabee, the national television challenge amounted to little more than a red herring to throw voters off the scent. The real culprit of the attack ads lay . . . in the backwater squabbles of Arkansas Republican politics. In fact, . . . the political chattering class in Arkansas was already well aware of the probable culprit behind the Club for Growth's decision to run costly advertisements against Huckabee. . . . The ads had been paid for by a spin-off group called Club for Growth.net, which files regular disclosures through the Internal Revenue Service. A quick review of those filings showed . . . a Little Rock neighbor and political rival of Huckabee's named Jackson T. "Steve" Stephens Jr. had given the group $125,000, including a $50,000 check just days before the 2006 election when it was too late to spend more on that election. A member of one of Arkansas' richest families, Stephens also serves as chairman of Club for Growth.net, along with his Arkansas business associate, Gary Faulkner. . . . The battle between Huckabee and Stephens dates back a decade and focuses mostly on their disagreements over the best fiscal policy for the state and the local Republican Party. Huckabee governed as a fiscal moderate; while he cut taxes, he also raised taxes . . . Stephens never made any secret of his displeasure at Huckabee's actions. In 2002, Huckabee decided to oppose a voter initiative to eliminate the state sales tax on groceries and medicine, an effort that Stephens was helping to fund.
. . . In fact, the Case of the Huck Attack was so easy to solve that it presented a second mystery -- the Case of the Coy Candidate. Why was Huckabee going on national television claiming not to know what everyone else knew about his old political foe in Arkansas? And what business did he have impugning the reputations of his rival candidates by suggesting that they were surreptitiously, if not illegally, using a third party to smear him?
In a conference call with reporters . . . Huckabee again repeated his claim that he did not know who was behind the campaign, an information deficit that would make him unique in Arkansas political circles. "I hope he is not involved in the Club for Growth stuff," Huckabee said about Stephens. "I would be disappointed and I would be wondering why." . . . Huckabee boasted of pushing through a state education reform initiative that Stephens supported and enacting other reforms from an advisory panel on which Stephens served. He also mentioned that both Stephens' brother and cousin were supporters of the Huckabee for President campaign. "He ought to love me," Huckabee said. The betting money believes Huckabee knows full well that he is searching for love in all the wrong places. But given the choice of responding to an attack ad and demonizing its backers on national television, Huckabee made the politically prudent choice. He would rather make a mystery out of the obvious. Rather than get bogged down in a discussion of his mixed record as a fiscal conservative in Arkansas, . . . [Full Article]
Tags: Arkansas, Club for Growth, Election 2008, Mike Huckabee, Politics, presidential candidate, Republican
Posted by Bill Smith at 11:21 AM - Post Link
4 Comments:
Why are you posting an article found on a pro-gay website?
Dear Anonymous,
First, what did you think about the author's content? You must have clicked on the link to begin to make a judgment about another website. We do not know if the website is what you call a "gay website." We did not that it had information a gay voter's guide for the GOP.
Second, although ARRA supports traditional marriage and traditional family values, it does not oppose gays. True it may not support what is perceived by us as a radical gay agenda. We do not know nor wish to know if the author of this article is gay.
Finally, we noted Michael Scherer's well written article that addressed Arkansas politics and the impact of Arkansas politics on the Mike Huckabee campaign race and Huckabee's reaction or non-reactions to such politics. Former Gov. Huckabee is running on his experience of 10 years as Arkansas governor. Than means all his experience and actions related to that experience are open for consideration and reporting.
It is fortunate, that we know more about Mike Huckabee as a fellow Arkansan. Also, it is unfortunate that we do not know more about the other presidential Republicans candidates. Maybe we need to find out what the Republicans in their home states feel about the candidate. Running for the Presidency is not like rooting for the home team - right or wrong. All things are reviewable and reportable in regard to the words of the candidate and past actions as an elected official. To do otherwise, would be unfair to our readers.
Also, it is unfortunate that we do not know more about the other presidential Republicans candidates. Maybe we need to find out what the Republicans in their home states feel about the candidate. Running for the Presidency is not like rooting for the home team - right or wrong. All things are reviewable and reportable in regard to the words of the candidate and past actions as an elected official. To do otherwise, would be unfair to our readers.
The way you are shilling for the Fred Thompson campaign in spite of the overwhelming evidence against him, I find it hard to believe that you are only "seeking the truth."
In case you think I am defending Huckabee, I am not. But I am pretty ticked off about your treatment of Newt Gingrich.
Dear Anonymous,
I know the truth hurts. If ticked off - why not identify yourself and weigh in with some concrete facts to enhance the discussion.
I am not opposed to any of the Republican candidates. The last one standing will be my candidate against what appears will be the Dem's Hillary.
I like others feel that some of our GOP candidates are unelectable and should bow out so we can focus on the others. Cox and Brownback are examples of candidates going nowhere. Each have some good points but they can't get off 1% or less in the polls of Republican voters. For the other candidates, I hope all the background info comes out now so we do not have to deal with it after the person is elected.
As for Newt, the last time I checked, Newt Gingrich is NOT a "official" candidate. He just keeps dangling a carrot before his supporters. Now he wants $30 million upfront to answer the "maybe" carrot question. Newt should get in now and stop talking about "maybe" and running down other candidates and everyone else in government from the sideline (he is like an ex-player-commentator) OR he should admit that he is out of the game and do what he does best - stir up ideas and fill the roll of a sideline commentator.
Post a Comment
<< Home