Posted on 09/14/2007 8:48:57 AM PDT by Calpernia
China has been a current topic for over 10 years.
>Are you seriously trying to tell me you didn’t post this to boost Hunter’s dismal ratings?<
Is an informed electorate a threat to your candidate? One don’t aim to boost one’s candidate’s ratings by exposing important information on another candidate. An informed electorate makes a wiser vote. And never has it been more important to do just that than in this election.
25 years.
Correction, ‘my perspective’ for over 10 years ;) I was speaking of my awareness.
That’s right. You are just a youngen.
::raspberry::
"Why don’t they trash other candidates who have higher ratings than Hunter (which means every other GOP candidate)?"
Trying to build up your candidate does not include wasting time posting anti whomever threads as I've seen so much from the Hunter and Romney supporters.
They should try just posting threads about their own candidate.
I can't remember ever posting an anti Hunter or Romney thread, only your that uninformed would one of these articles sway your opinion.
It looks like a everyone against Thompson party here lately.
Then you are a little wiser about Hunter now aren’t you..so what is your complaint? And I already said I am not a FredHead, I haven’t made a decision yet. That being said, I’d prefer a candidate that knows the Constitution and from my research, Hunter doesn’t know the difference between Congressional Authorization and Appropriation or he does and is just posturing for votes on the border fence. Either way, it is a black mark against him with me. Another black mark has just been created in that Hunter supporters are being disengenuous about their motivations in posting this thread. Raising the bar of integrity? I think not.
Sound bites put together are nothing but spin, and your posts on Hunter are pure spin. We are aware of the incidents, but we are also aware of the truth, which was NOT represented in those sound bites.
You must be a Ron Paul supporter. Every good patriot knows and reveres the Constitution, and Duncan Hunter is no exception, believe me.
Re-read my #62.
Thanks, Walter. Sometime in the distant past I heard that William Saffire was a Republican.
You are full of it. Hunter’s law superseded any previous fence nonsense.
Hey, I know! What’s Bob Dole up to?!
..I am witnessing many of late who are possessed with dark, bilious vapors...
Yep. Time to bring it on. Only difference is that the Hunter supporters won’t be hitting abuse and crying like little girls.
No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.Hunter's insinuations that the fence has been funded are WRONG and that is no spin. Here are excerpts from a recent article in response to Hunter's claim that the border fence funding is available...
DHS Spokeswoman Laura Keehner's comment:It is also a fact that Congress withheld $950M of the $1.2B previously appropriated for the fence:While the Secure Fence Act has authorized more miles, “there is a difference between authorization and appropriations,” she said.
Hunter spokesman Joe Kaspar's response:
“Hunter believes laws are meant to be followed” and “the money is there.”
The fence law dictates that in Texas a fence would stretch east out of El Paso; from Del Rio to Eagle Pass and Laredo to Brownsville, leaving a huge gap between Del Rio and Laredo. It also sets out locations in California and calls for fencing off the Arizona border from Mexico. Though the total fencing was believed to be about 700 miles, congressional researchers say it is closer to about 850 miles.So there you have it, with no spin. If he doesn't know the difference between authorization and appropriation then he doesn't understand the Constitution as well as you think he does.A separate law funding Homeland Security Department spending provided $1.2 billion for the fencing. But that law also withholds $950 million of the sum until the House and Senate appropriations committees approve the department's plan for spending the money, giving those committees say over the design, location and length of the fence.
Oh geez...where are all the ORLY? pictures when I need one...
To: Admin Moderator; ravingnutterAnd he may be special to you, but Hunter's laws don't supersede the Constitution.Any reason why you can’t start a different thread with that?
22 posted on 09/14/2007 9:37:43 AM PDT by Calpernia
You do know that Hunter was NOT mixed up in Cunningham’s covert doings. Being the stalwart man he is, Rep. Hunter did not desert a friend when that friend was in trouble. He also did NOT condone what Cunningham did in any way, shape or form.
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.