Don’t let us down TEXAS! :)
Here’s Hunter’s stand on a few important issues, and you can click on below link for more:
http://www.issues2002.org/CA/Duncan_Hunter.htm
Duncan Hunter on Abortion
Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
Voted YES on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
Voted YES on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
Voted YES on funding for health providers who don’t provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
Voted YES on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
Duncan Hunter on Gun Control
Voted YES on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers. (Oct 2005)
Voted YES on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
Voted YES on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)
Rated A+ by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Dec 2003)
Duncan Hunter on Foreign Policy
Voted YES on deterring foreign arms transfers to China. (Jul 2005)
Voted YES on reforming the UN by restricting US funding. (Jun 2005)
Voted NO on keeping Cuba travel ban until political prisoners released. (Jul 2001)
Voted NO on $156M to IMF for 3rd-world debt reduction. (Jul 2000)
Voted NO on Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China. (May 2000)
Voted NO on $15.2 billion for foreign operations. (Nov 1999)
Duncan Hunter has my vote and, in my own view, is unchallenged even by the great and mysterious Fred Thompson. He is a man who actually seems to live his creed.
Hunter, to date, has done poorly in the polls because of lack of exposure. Yet Hunter has great grass roots appeal to conservatives. Is it possible that, once again, the pundits of talk radio and other venues of the right have decided that the Republican party is better served by someone who already has name recognition?
Is it possible that they have already decided who “can win”, based upon that already given name recognition? And will they, once again, sacrifice conservative principle in their choice of candidates.
If conservative media were as, uh, interested in ideas as they say they are, why would they not give the various candidates equal attention and put all the ideas on the table, identified with their proponents? Right up to the primaries?
Yet in most “big” talk radio, Hunter is virtually unmentioned. They all jump in on the Romney-Guliani-Thompson debate. The others go, well, unmentioned, except occasionally and with mirth or dismissal.
This, to me, indicates a kind of intellectual fraud.