I did not know about Hunter’s votes on military pay and benefits. He has several big spending bills that he has voted for, and he votes no on military pay? Who would have thought it.
I find his earmarks for DP-2 to be problematic because they’ve gone on so long without successful tests. A project needs to show some sign of success to end up being funded for so long.
I don’t want to say anything negative about him because he is a conservative, yet it troubles me that some supporters think he is without flaw which just isn’t true.
And there are a few ethics issues like the banking scandal he was involved in about 1993. An ethics issue. The congress ought to live by the same rules as the rest of the country, as Fred says was a reason he was elected in 1994. That banking scandal gave rise to a lot of the feelings that congresspersons act in unethical ways and think they are above the law. And the earmarks which several in Congress have been trying to do something about. Many have engaged in earmarks but that is an ethics issue and some Republicans are trying to do stop them. It would be nice if Hunter would make a statement to support those trying to end the use of earmarks.
Hunter’s supporters act as if we are supposed to ignore his problems and he doesn’t have to explain or give a statement about any of it.
What has he said about limited government that any voter should think he would do any better in the presidency than he has done in congress?
Fred made statements and firmed up his position on immigration a long time ago. Even though some didn’t understand what he meant by enforce the law.
It would be nice if Hunter could be as forthright as Fred on some of these things instead of Hunter or his supporters referring to Fred as a johnny come lately, then ignoring Guiliani and sanctuary cities and Huckabee and his immigration past. What is that compared to someone who hasn’t made a move yet like Guiliani and Huckabee!
Thanks for this post Josh, well done.
Duncan Hunter was never charged with any wrongdoing. His good friend Randy “Duke” Cunningham was convicted of influence peddling, but Hunter is not guilty by association. The Dems would like to taint Hunter for his friendship with Cunningham, much as some Hunter supporters have tried to taint Fred Thompson for his friendship with McCain.
The House of Representatives is a good ol’ boys club, just like the Senate. Nothing wrong with that. In the old days, pre-Clinton, members in both houses commonly developed friendships even with members of the opposing political parties. They put aside their differences at the end of each days’ session and were civil to each other.
So let’s confine our criticism of Hunter to the issues, and let’s not fall for the liberals’ leftist lies about Duncan Hunter. The Dems would try to fabricate something based on Hunter’s association with Cunningham and tell the lie over and over again if Hunter was the GOP nominee - no doubt about that.
There’s enough in the issues to make me prefer Thompson, but I’m primarily a small-government conservative to whom spending issues are high on my list of importance.
Like I said, Hunter’s a good man. I don’t have any ethical problems with him at all. I trust his honesty and consider him to be of good character until proven otherwise, and nobody has proven otherwise because there’s nothing there.