I’ve heard an interesting statistic TWICE over the last several months (one from a public official, and one from a lobbyist/academician):

That when you stack up Virginia with all of the other States from a “tax burden” standpoint, that Virginia is 47th out of 50.  This means that there are only 3 states that are more “tax-friendly.”  Isn’t that great?  My being a fiscal conservative lends me to believe that’s a good thing.  So I would call that a number 4 ranking not a 47.

There’s only one problem:  It isn’t true.  We do have a RELATIVELY friendly state for taxes, especially business taxes.  But 4th ranked we are not.  On individual taxes we usually rank (rank as in most “tax-friendly”) somewhere among the top 15-20, and on business taxes we were ranked number 8 for 2006.   We’re in the top half, but one thing strike me as odd:  Why would someone tout this statistic as a rationalization for RAISING taxes without any acknowledgment or analysis of whether there is indeed a connection between a higher tax burden and “better” government.

A few links on the subject:

http://money.cnn.com/ga….friendliest/8.html

http://www.taxfoundation…./show/335.html

http://www.taxfoundation…./show/1369.html

The real good news for business owners:  I did hear (from another public official) that we were the HIGHEST ranked State (according to Forbes) from an overall “Business Friendliness” standpoint.  Guess what?  That one was true:

http://www.forbes.com…bizstates-table.html

Anyone who would like to see the POSSIBILITY of a Huckabee nomination, need look no further than:

Right Smart

Personally, I think it would be a mistake…once again…to count this man out. At the VERY LEAST, he’s a serious factor at the convention for pulling together the party. Especially given a) Dobson’s endorsement, b) the demographic makeup of the majority of the States left, and c) the fact that there’s another GOP debate scheduled toward the end of February.

It is absolutely impossible for McCain to have the needed 471 delegates between now and the next debate at the end of February, because there are only 308 up for grabs between now and then…which Huckabee will undoubtedly win many of…conceivable a majority.

And thank you to Chuck Todd…who is actually paying attention to the Huckabee factor and not simply ignoring it to start writing about the general election. Considering the Obama factor, if Huckabee were to pull off winner-take-all Virginia (maybe a long shot, but with my Loudoun “Bully Pullpit”, and the millions of hits I get a day…) then this gets REALLY interesting.

Here’s my comment on Chuck Todd’s site:

Here’s the deal…Huckabee is NOT going to exit the race whether or not he loses Virginia…He’s going to stay in and gather up at least as many delegates as Romney has. Why in God’s name wouldn’t he do that?

He will DEFINITELY win more total delegates than Romney if he stays in…therefore he will DEFINITELY have significant clout at the convention.

McCain CANNOT win more than the needed 471 before March 4th…period. He will have to debate Huckabee (and Paul) later this month…period. There is good reason for this to happen because if Huckabee is GOING to concede, then the two can have a little GOP love-fest to unite the party around McCain’s Iraq agenda (while pissing off Ron Paul). Everybody wins.

But if Huckabee makes (yet another) comeback…(and winning Virginia would probably be required) then who knows?

Mr. Huber seems to think that the fat lady is clearing her throat, but the question is: Who is she voting for?