Posted on 08/07/2007 7:36:00 AM PDT by Calpernia
Another Hunter (Second Amendment) related link:
http://www.nraila.org/media/pdfs/RepHunterLtr042505.pdf
I’ll be adding that to my next table post!
Excellent, excellent article!!! Everyone who claims to be a conservative needs to read this. Most of us knew all this before but Mr. Madison lays it out quite nicely and I like the way he reminds Rush about defending and promoting Reaganism.
A.J. Madison bump!
“Another Hunter (Second Amendment) related link:
http://www.nraila.org/media/pdfs/RepHunterLtr042505.pdf “
Thanks.
Marking for when I have much more time to read.
Excellent. He gave Paul that evil glare! LOL
I agree that Mr. Thompson would seem to be a stronger candidate. In our image-based society, Mr. Thompson is good at pretending to be the real man that Duncan Hunter really is. Until people learn to see beyond image, Mr. Thompson's ability to manipulate image will benefit him tremendously.
I disagree with the assertion that Mr. Thompson would be a better president. Neither he nor Mr. Hunter has any executive experience. We really don't know whether they are capable of running anything. In his one attempt at running an investigation in the Senate, Mr. Thompson was very ineffective in the "Chinagate" hearings. Instead of sticking to the issue at hand, he let John Glenn divert the hearings into posturing on campaign finance reform, and he ended up voting for that stupid law. The closest that Mr. Hunter has come to real executive experience is chairing the Armed Services Committee from 2002 to 2006. He did a reasonably good job as far as we know, but the job was not high profile. The Democrats had no reason to derail the work of that committee, so he shouldn't have faced any serious challenges.
I could be happy enough with Mr. Thompson, but I trust him less than I trust Mitt Romney. At least Mitt Romney has the excuse of having been in Massachusetts where he had no choice but to be somewhat liberal. As a senator from Tennessee, Mr. Thompson could have been a much stronger conservative leader, but he refused.
In many ways, Duncan Hunter is a great "throwback" Republican. Like many leaders in the party's first forty years, he understands that a country without strong manufacturing cannot be a strong country. He's willing to endorse policies that will strengthen our manufacturing base. Like Theodore Roosevelt, he's extremely masculine and yet knows how to be a gentleman. Also like Theodore Roosevelt, he's not afraid to curb abuses of big industrialists when he feels some control is necessary.
Bill
, Do you know this from personal experience? Not trying to take anything away from your post, and I can understand what you are saying.
What I am curious about is - is the lack of "personality and charisma" due to his actual shortcomings in that department, or is it because he is not one of the media's darlings? Because I personally have not seen enough of Hunter to determine his personality. His videos on his web site are good. His performance in the debates has been good (what little opportunity he has had).
The media is dictating to us who our candidates should be, and I don't like that - particularly because so many voters are falling for it.
I was afraid, particularly when I first started liking Fred, that things would come out that tarnish his so-called conservative record.
McLame-FineSwine, as others have put it, could have been a lapse or misjudgment. But as the days go by, more comes out that truly sheds a not-so-nice light on Fred.
So - just over 50% in favor of gun owners (according to GOA, which I trust), and other bits emerging from Thompson’s record, just don’t think Fred should be our first choice. We have to quit letting the media pick our candidates.
“He has staked out an originalist position on Second Amendment rights and almost defeated, single-handedly, Clinton’s phony Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) in 1994.”
Another example of how EFFECTIVE Duncan Hunter has been. Meanwhile others merely talk the talk.
I support Duncan Hunter for President of the United States. He has the drive and talent to lead the nation. I hope and pray that his is the next U.S President.
Me too! B4DH! Bump for Duncan Hunter! He is included in prayers at least twice a day here!
Thats what I wanted to say basically.
If Duncan Hunter is going to win, he must have the most prayer support of all the candidates. I mean, he needs a miracle, and I don’t think any of the other candidates deserves a miracle more than Duncan Hunter. Your prayers will surround him with angels, and eventually, that light will become so bright, that all the people will sense it.
Fortunately, not enough to get Hillary elected.
Great article. Thanks!
I’ve got my Duncan Hunter bumper sticker on my car.
GO DUNCAN HUNTER!!!
Good reasoning. Ultimately, I disagree, but you make a good argument.
One of the reasons that I disagree is that although it pays to be a good manager if one is president, that isn’t the only requirement. Mr. Bush is a good manager - heck, he has a Harvard MBA. But to be president, it helps to have something more. Call it charisma, charm, force of personality, but it’s that quality that folks see in a person and that then persuades folks that that person is a leader.
Mr. Thompson has this quality. Mr. Bush perhaps has a very small bit of it. I don’t see it in Mr. Hunter. It’s something that the want of has caused problems for Mr. Bush.
“As a senator from Tennessee, Mr. Thompson could have been a much stronger conservative leader, but he refused.”
I think that Mr. Thompson imagined his role differently than many folks who call themselves conservatives imagine it.
sitetest
I know this, to the degree that I know it, from watching the same stuff that anyone else watches.
sitetest
Yes, yes, in esence I agree with all of it.
However, what do you do with somebody who has been here for many years, successfully integrated into society, had his kids here, they may only know English, America is the only home they have, the guy hasn’t committed any crime sxcept to invade our border - peacefully?
How do you handle this mess? This mess was caused by the two Bushes and Clinton - directly. They were the chief executives charged with enforcing the laws of the land and they refused AND CONTINUE to refuse to do so. With those invaders who have come recently - say within the last 5 - 10 years - o.k. boot them. You pick the time frame and circumstances. But thank to the mess three administrations have made we will have to gingerly deal with some of these cases on a case by case basis.
Like I said before, the important thing is get control of our borders - NOW.
We do it by building the wall.
We do it by putting out of business those companies who knowingly hire illegal invaders. We sieze their assets and liquidate them to compensate society for the cost of dealing with the illeglas they have conspired to lure here.
We take financial action against Mexico’s assets and make it clear to them that we consider their actions in aiding these invaders a hostile act.
We require all new immigrants to learn English and make it the official national language.
We stop providing any benefits to illegal invaders.
We take action against those criminal conspiracies called “sanctuary movements” regardless of religion or ethnicity.
We take command of those individuals who come here under Visa programs and follow up with those who violate those visas.
We hire more border guards and even use the National Gurad along the Mexican border, if necessary.
If we do all these things, we will see the illegal inader problem evaporate.
>>>The closest that Mr. Hunter has come to real executive experience is chairing the Armed Services Committee from 2002 to 2006. He did a reasonably good job as far as we know, but the job was not high profile. The Democrats had no reason to derail the work of that committee, so he shouldn’t have faced any serious challenges.
Actually, that is not true:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1845268/posts
HUNTER INTRODUCES “NUCLEAR SECRETS SAFETY ACT” (Duncan Hunter - 2000)
>>>”The Clinton-Gore Administration has, through fumbling incompetence and short-sighted policies, lost critical defense secrets,” said Hunter. “The recent incident at Los Alamos National Laboratory is indicative of the irresponsibility and disregard this administration has given to protecting America’s national security. This legislation begins to correct the problem.”<<<
:)
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.