Posted on 10/26/2007 11:42:37 AM PDT by pissant
Washington, D.C. – Republican presidential candidate Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) criticized fellow GOP contenders Thompson and Romney after they released ‘position papers’ on illegal immigration apparently discovering only just recently the policy he has been advocating for years.
Both the Romney and Thompson plans talk tough on border security and cracking down on illegal immigration, but the plans beg the question as to why their records don’t reflect such rhetoric.
Rep. Hunter explained, “I can tell you that my proposals to significantly increase and strengthen deportations, penalties, interior and border enforcement, and to curtail the incentives for illegal aliens generally had few vocal allies in the US Senate…Mr. Thompson certainly was not among them.”
He continued, “As for Mr. Romney, the fact that many cities in Massachusetts were, and remain, protected sanctuaries for illegal aliens, makes one wonder if this is just one more of the those ‘I saw the light’ moments.”
While Congressman Hunter is pleased to see the GOP candidates move towards the positions he has been advocating for decades, he stated, “watching Senator Thompson, Governor Romney, Mayor Giuliani and now even Governor Huckabee attempting to outflank one another on this issue is, frankly, amusing; after long careers where the problem was either ignored, or in some cases, exacerbated”.
Rep. Hunter authored and shepherded legislation that built a two-layer border fence outside of San Diego leading to a 53% drop in crime and 90% decrease in drug trafficking along that corridor. Hunter’s message of a stronger national defense, tighter border security, and fair trade with China is resonating with voters across the nation.
For more information or to schedule an interview with Congressman Hunter, please contact: Brett Farley: (866) 407-4258 or brett@gohunter08.com
But Bush wasn’t the alternative to Gore in the primaries . . . that’s the point! You act as if the primaries are the general election. You can vote for a conservative in the primaries and it’s not a vote for Clinton or a Democrat at all. You can still vote for the best choice in the general election even if it’s not the true conservative you voted for in the primary. BUT if you work hard and are lucky, you may just get someone you can really support whole-heartedly if you go for the conservative in the primary. There is no reason to give up before you even fight for what you believe in.
SO let me get this straight, Bush and Thompson are Communist?
Is that what you are saying?
I want to be very clear on this one.
I think that we should have had conservatives running for President as Republicans since Reagan. We haven’t had a single one because we are too busy voting for the consensus candidate. We are handicapping ourselves out of any possibility of saving our country.
Well...
Steve Forbes over George Bush any day of the week.
Having participated in a number of campaigns, and watching Hunter not get any face time it is fairly easy to point to his campaign management as the failure.
There have been numerous opportunities for Hunter to set himself apart, but it hasn't happened.
Here are a just couple of examples.
Press Conference in Texas attended by ONE reporter who found out about the press conference on the internet, not from the campaign. Sure, he won a straw poll in Texas, but none of the other candidates were there. And again, did this win get exploited in the next debates? Nope. It was an anomaly, a bump in the road.
Let's look at the San Diego County fires. THIS IS HIS DISTRICT. There should be a news conference every other day on what is happening, the support coming, interfacing with the governor, and the appearance with the President on his visit.
Where was his management? These are PRIME opportunities to get your candidates face nationally broadcast, and nothing came of it.
Now some of the DuncanDelusionists© will say..."He was busy helping."......."It's about helping, not politicing." My response? It's politics, and when you are running for President of the United States, it's about image, and that is a NATIONAL requirement to win as POTUS.
Duncan may be the 'perfect' candidate, but you couldn't tell from his campaign management.
Elections are not about what you and I think, its about what those idiots watching "American Idol" who by some terrible Constitutional decision made many many years ago, have the right to vote.
Bush came across as wet paper too! Bush is a terrible, terrible public speaker and the appearance of arrogance that Bush projects is irritating to most people. He had little to nothing over Forbes EXCEPT that people decided Bush could win and Forbes couldn’t (based on what they heard from the media). But the media is not friendly to conservatives so . . . our impression will always be that the conservative can’t win while the moderate can. Then we got No Child Left Behind, Prescription Drugs coverage, and the fastest rate of government growth since Roosevelt from the “moderate” George Bush . . . a loss from Bob Dole . . . and tax increases from George Bush I.
I saw a response from some one here about the fact that that Duncan wouldn’t “exploit” the situation with the fires. Hell it’s not exploitation to be there, be involved and at the same time make it work to your advantage. That’s what successful politicians learn early on, the art of doing both, doing the job and doing the promotion. It’s what gets you bumped up stairs.
Everyone loves the purist, the guy who is above the fray, but outside of their adherents, they don’t pay attention to him long.
As for the rest, remember the thing we have gotten from Bush though. Judge Roberts, tax cuts, strong stand on the WOT to name a few. Mixed bag, sure, but better than what could have been.
My basic view is that the system is broken. The same argument you are making for Thompson as “the best that can win” is being made for Guilianni (he can beat Hillary, he’s our man), and the same argument was made for both Bushes and Dole. Support CONSERVATIVES.
I am...
Are you? Thompson supported McCain Feingold. Voted against the impeachment of Clinton. Left the Senate to go be an actor on TV. He may end up being our nominee but there is no reason to support a guy like him over Hunter at this stage of the game imo.
I am saying that the goals of the globalists is one world government. More than likely it will turn out to be Communist or worse. Bush is a globalist, and Fred has said he thinks the globalism is beneficial to the USA. If the shoe fits...
Is that clear enough for you?
Interesting...
Yes that clears it up...
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.