Explain how I am doing that.
You claim that Gilcrest has a great record, but you cite nothing but his vietnam service and his founding of the minutemen.
Furthermore, you claim that Campbell is 'faking' it, and isn't a real conservative, even though you can't seem to attack anything but his record on illegal immigration.
Yet you keep insisting that Gilcrest is better on all issues, because he is a 'real' conservative, even though you cannot cite anything else other then his vietnam record as any sort of record of any sort that he has.
It would logically follow then, that his vietnam record is a paramount issue to you that proves what sort of Congressman he would be. If this is your standard, it would logically follow that you would vote for Kerry, since he had a vietnam record and purple hearts as well.
Of course, what you really mean, is that you merely feel that Gilcrest is more genuine of a man, not a career politician, or something along those lines, and that a vietnam record, while not a perfect indicator (i.e. John Kerry), is a pretty good one.
But what it all boils down to, is that you 'feel' Gilcrest would make a better congressman. But it's just that, intuition. Beyond Illegal immigration, you have no proof or hard evidence that he is good on any issue.
Learn to spell, and then maybe we can talk some more.