The answer to Mitt's tax raising/lower question doesn't determine whether he's a fiscal conservative or not

Here's what I think needs to be said about this stupid confrontation that Mitt & Fred keep trying to set up about the raising/lowering tax question. {It's very similar to the age-old question, Do you still beat your wife Mr. Jones? That is, the question, in and of itself is deceiving and misses the essential issue.}

Here's what could be said, that Mike Huckabee raised (and lowered taxes) but if Mitt or Fred thinks that that fact in and of itself makes be a fiscal liberal then their logic is very flawed. It's what you do in the whole fiscal picture - like also cutting taxes - and creating a $800 billion surplus - and it's what you DO WITH the taxes that makes you a liberal or conservative - like putting it to work to repair the broken school system that the former Arkansas Governor-become-President left ranked at 49th place in the Court and have it achieve #8th ranking! If you use it toward socialist type ends, then you're liberal, and if you use it toward economic stimulus sort of ends that develop business and education and the building blocks of personal responsibility and ingenuity, then you're conservative."


As to the Michigan car manufacturing issue, I'm very sorry to hear that things are as bad or worse in MI as they were in the late '70s when the car manuf started going to Asia. But the realities are that there is no magic wand, and that Republican fiscal conservatism is about laying a foundation for innovation and free competition (eg change the regulation imbalance betwn US & outside, get rid of tax on productivity, encourage innovation), not about promising or guaranteeing employment, which is close to what Romney is trying to "say," though I doubt that he'll "do."

I think that by Mitt promising that "the jobs will come back," clearly inferring the auto industry jobs, he's looking in the rear view mirror rather than toward the possible innovation and American entreprenuership of the future. Looking backwards for a goal is always a mistake. [Note, I didn't say looking backwards in itself is bad, just looking there for a GOAL is a mistake.] The solution is always the as yet unknown and undiscovered item/event in the future.

___________________________________________

Wishing Mike & his supporters All the Best,
Theresa
The Kids' Bank Book