Posted on 11/23/2007 7:02:20 PM PST by Josh Painter
>>>>upsdriver wrote: “To me, Thompson is no better than Romney or Guilianni.”<<<<
“Demonstrating that you don’t what what you’re talking about.”
Oh really? All three of them while in office governed from the left of center and slightly right of center and now are doing their darnedest to convince everyone they are conservative. No real surprise there, everyone who runs for the Republican nomination always runs hard to the right. Their history does matter. What conservative causes did Sen. Fred Thompson champion while in office? What was he truly passionate about? Those are things that matter to me. Flowery language in the heat of a campaign means nothing.
IMO the best we have a shot at this time around is a choice between the :..
LOL! You are sharp this morning!!!
Not going to happen. The Hunter supporters, for whatever reason, a filled with a vitrol that mimics the Paul supporters, IMHO.
“Fred supporters are beginning to sound like Paulites.”
Pot. Kettle. Black. No Donut is in any position to accuse someone else of sounding like Paulites.
“So long America! You don’t deserve good leaders, you need to settle for more of the same.”
That about says it all. Go back to DU. You’ll fit right in.
Couldn’t have said it any better. Thanks.
“We should focus our time (in the primaries) on eliminating Rudy, McCain, Huckabee, and Romney from the race. In that order....according to their level of liberalism,insanity, and acting.”
Personnally I think you need to stick to touting the virtues of your candidate of choice and avoid “bashing” anyone. Now I don’t consider pointing out differences to be bashing as long as the facts of disagreement are presented accurately and without bias and especially hyperbole. I’ve even stopped “bashing” Guiliani because it did no good - I wrote things like “Rudy the Rumpranger”, etc. I don’t like Guiliani’s policies and record, but it accomplishes nothing the do a parody of someone. If my motive is to sway others to my way of thinking, then I have failed because vicious rhetoric just entrenches folks.
I have watched supporters of just about everyone of the GOP candidates engage in ridiculous rants (myself included). It accomplishes nothing, and an intelligent person would be wise to ignore rants and biased spin on records of candidates as presented by a supporter of another candidate.
There just is no way to know how this is all going to play out. Burning bridges is not a smart move at this stage. By all means, stick to your own values and principles. But learn to play nice, and stop the ad-homenen attacks on anyone who disagrees with your “boy” on an issue. None of us are going to get all we want. Also, the silly tags (of which I have been guilty - like the Rudy the Rumpranger) belong to political entertainers like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. They are cute on radio, but really have no place here.
Hunter voted for “No Child left behind”. That’s an expansion of government. The dept. of Education is unconstitutional. Government should not be “teaching” (indoctrinating) kids.
Fact of the matter is, only 66 out of 534 did NOT vote for it.
Has there ever been a bill voted on to abolish the DOE?
I respect you a great deal. I’m curious as to why you are referring to the Randy Cunningham issue, when I didn’t. I referred to the earmarks issue and the funding of the DP-2.
If you have to decide on a vote partly based on the character of the candidate, then ethics issues deserve an answer from the candidate and I’m not aware of any answers being given. If he has made statements I’d love to know about it.
The way a person acts and votes is more evidence than the words of other people.
I did not say Hunter did any influence peddling, and haven’t considered him guilty. It encourages negative impressions to have things like this happen and no statement from the candidate. I’m not willing to give him a pass based on silence.
I didn’t hear anything like this from any liberal leftist, I did my own research and stumbled upon it.
And I’m leaning toward what papasmurf said in #10. It is an uneven playing field if others can criticize Fred Thompson for everything [energy level, the way his wife looks, to infinity] but Hunter does not give an answer to issues that are a problem. Has he given explanations for the voting record issues that I believe you mentioned? Or has he been silent? If he says he is for limited government but hasn’t got a sterling record with regard to limited government, why doesn’t Hunter give us an answer? Those are all issues.
Ethics is an issue, earmarks are an issue and it is time something was done about it. Whatever happened in the past [good old boys] doesn’t need to continue in the future. As far as I know, there are members of Congress who are starting to do something about earmarks, and I’ve heard nothing from Hunter about it. It is time he took a stand on that.
I also have concerns on some issues with his voting record, as you said.
I didn’t say anything about Cunningham and don’t wish to now.
Thank you for that link.
Fact of the matter is, only 66 out of 534 did NOT vote for it.
Has there ever been a bill voted on to abolish the DOE?
So because everyone else is doing it, voting to expand government , then it's ok for Hunter to do it too? What's wrong is wrong. The government is much too large now as it is . We should be repealing laws that created this big government not passing more legislation that expands the power,size and or responsibilities of government.
The annual federal budget is 3 trillion dollars. Which of our politicians is talking about how that is too much, how high that spending makes our taxes, and how to cut this government spending?
The only difference between a welfare state and a totalitarian socialist state is a matter of time. That would destroy our civilization. We are near the tipping point. Government is just too big, 3 trillion dollars of investment taken away from the productive private sector and individual Americans is too much. Who would say that 3 Trillion dollars of government spending per year is not enough? Liberals that's who but that's because liberals are communists.
DOE, FEC, FDA,EPA , HUD , Dept of health and human services, dept of interior, dept of commerce, dept of energy etc. need to be abolished. then our taxes would be 5% instead of the 50% they are now. Has any politician talked about abolishing the DOE or any of these unconstitutional agencies? not anyone in the top tier and certainly no socialist democrat has.
No...no it is not. The point was, unless there is a bill presented to abolish the DOE, which I would support, then we are stuck with it. If we are stuck with it, then at least do something to hold them accountable by producing results or lose funding.
The fact that only 12% of the entire US CONgre$$ voted against the bill should tell us that there was more to this.
I do not disagree with most of what you have said. I'm all for abolishing most, if not all of the departments you named. I also think we need to get out of the UN and get them out of the US. That alone would save billions of dollars every year. I do not think we should be giving foreign aid to most of the countries we do either. But that's another story.
In the last 6 months I have spent a great deal of time in the second largest welfare county in the country. I was constantly ranting against the dregs of society living off the stolen tax dollars of the productive members of society.
Let's stop supporting 38 million illegal alien invaders. That would save us billions of dollars every year. And while we are at it, quit sending their home country millions every year to facilitate the invasion.
Otherwise I don't rate the fiscal stuff all that high on my list of most important issues. If we do not Win the War none of it will matter much. The war, borders, illegal alien invasion and our defenders of freedom are what matter to me.
I like Tanc, Hunter, and FRed...and I think your right, the negative attacks on one another need to be concentrated on the opposing party.
Keep up the good work.
I see in this article that Hunter is now acknowledged to be a 4% candidate, whereas the official talking points before was that he was a 1% candidate.
.
.
.
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
Posted on 11/15/2007 3:43:17 AM PST by Kevmo
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.