Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Duncan Who ?
2-14-07 | rodomila

Posted on 02/14/2007 7:28:54 PM PST by rodomila

I used to think Free Republic was a site with mostly rational people. I can't understand why so many of you waste your time with Duncan Hunter fantasies. Really folks hallucinogenic drugs are illegal and bad for you too. Stop taking them !!! No one outside of the Hunter family and this website thinks he has the remotest chance of being elected President. The Ronald Reagan comparisons are idiotic. Reagan had been a two term Governor of the largest state in the nation. He had been a national household name for over 40 years when he ran in 1980. God only made one Ronald Reagan. Duncan Hunter, although he is a solid Congressman, is no Ronald Reagan. I'm a conservative and I would love to have a viable conservative to work for this election cycle. But we don't have one. McCain is a no go for me. I loathe the treacherous man and believe he is non-compos mentis (loony). That leaves Mitt and Rudy. Newt's entry would hopefully pull the other two to the right (which would be great), and he might even win the nomination (which would probably be bad as I don't think he would win the general election).

That would leave us with Hildebeast or even worse B. Hussein Obama. Therefore, although I'm pro-life, pro-gun, and anti the mainstreaming of homosexuality, I am trying to decide between Rudy and Mitt.

For me the war on islamo nazi psychos is the top issue and Rudy gets my vote on that one.

Issue two is finding a candidate who won't give in to global warming hysteria because that is the lefties preferred path currently to world government and destruction of our economic system. I have to look into Mitt's position on this because Rudy made some rather discouraging comments on this recently (although they were not as bad as originally reported here.)

Next is immigration. We need someone to enforce our laws and get control of the borders. Mitt seems to the right of Rudy on this but both have a way to go. Maybe Tancredo in the race can generate some movement.

Taxes - we need to keep the Bush tax cuts at the very minimum and hopefully get a bolder overhaul of the system.

Judges - we want young Scalias.

Spending restraint - I'm hoping that both, as successful businessmen, will hold the line on spending better than GWB who was a total disappointment in this area.

Let's try to move the viable candidates closer to us on the issues rather than engage in self defeating fantasies of "ideal" candidates who no one has ever heard of and who have never run any larger organization than a Congressman's staff.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: 2008election; duncanhunter; guiliani; hunter; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360361-373 last
To: Czar
The only situation that would cause me to vote for Rudy is if the only choice is Rudy or the former First Bitch.

Yes, I like Rudy and he did great things in NYC. That said he is not my primary choice to be the nominee.

But I will vote for him in a Rudy v. FB, match-up.

361 posted on 02/16/2007 5:47:17 PM PST by FreeReign (Still waiting for the best conservative candidate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr

Similarly, my thinking is that extending the legal protection of 'citizen' to unborn children would violate what I believe would be a greater purpose -- the freedom of those women to have control over their own bodies.
***I fail to see your greater purpose. The woman chooses to engage in the act(that's my presumption, leaving alone any unchosen act) that even 2nd graders know can bring forth a human life. We sacrifice that human life so that the woman can have "control" for a few weeks? If that human life were transferred to another, safer place where he could thrive, that woman has given up nothing but an afternoon and that, my FRiend, is a greater purpose.

Illegal abortions would force women to go thru a pregnancy they could otherwise end.
***That doesn't make sense. Perhaps you mean [Criminalizing abortions]... so I'll respond to that. Yes, the woman now has the legal right to otherwise end that innocent life. 200 years ago, citizens had the legal right to have slaves. We grew up as a country, and extended the right to liberty to those slaves. Now, NO ONE has the right to own a slave and it isn't even perceived as an intrusion. America is slowly coming to the realization that those are babies getting killed, and 90% of them think it would be wise to limit the PBA ghastliness.

Because to me, that's where the 'slavery' analogy falls short. A slave is not also a part of another human being's body.
***True enough. That's why I try to focus discussion on the side of a baby which is viable, because once that baby can survive without the mother, your contention is no longer true in principle.


362 posted on 02/16/2007 5:58:52 PM PST by Kevmo (The first labor of Huntercles: Defeating the 3-headed RINO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
We sacrifice that human life so that the woman can have "control" for a few weeks?

For up to 8 months, actually. And the time isn't even the point. Going thru the experience of pregnancy should not be forced, when there are other options.

Now if we had a technology that could remove the fetus from the beginning, and then that fetus could be transferred to an artificial womb, and then that fetus could be adopted later -- that would be fine, to me. The procedure to the mother would be little different than an abortion.

But until that time, I don't support making abortions illegal, personally.

Again, to me, this life is such an undeveloped state that ending it is no big deal.

That's why I try to focus discussion on the side of a baby which is viable, because once that baby can survive without the mother, your contention is no longer true in principle.

I disagree. Again, it has nothing to do with 'viability', in my mind. It has to do with the state of development of the human mind.

I'm certainly no expert on the subject. But up until some point, the human brain is less developed than that of a dog. So to me, killing that human brain would be little different than killing a dog. Not something you'd want to do, but if you decided it had to be done, then you'd do it.

To me, humans are just animals. The highest life-form on the planet so far, but still just animals.

363 posted on 02/16/2007 6:22:07 PM PST by Dominic Harr (Conservative: The "ant", to a liberal's "grasshopper".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr

Now if we had a technology that could remove the fetus from the beginning, and then that fetus could be transferred to an artificial womb, and then that fetus could be adopted later -- that would be fine, to me. The procedure to the mother would be little different than an abortion.
***We DO have a technology that can remove the fetus towards the END (it's called premature birth), that's why they're considered viable. Please address that issue. I'm glad to see that such a procedure would be okay to you early in a pregnancy. As technology progresses, we get closer to that point. In the meantime we can save millions of lives by extending protection to late term preborn babies who would live outside the womb. It is NOT a dog. Left to itself and outside resources, it becomes a glorious, beautiful child.


To me, humans are just animals. The highest life-form on the planet so far, but still just animals.
***We differ there as well. I think I'll let you have the last word on this exchange. There is an acknowledged darkness in your soul that I find disturbing; I certainly wouldn't want a president to be like that. I wish you the best but I would hope that you come to terms with yourself on the spiritual side, the same way that the original plaintiff did in Roe v. Wade. I will pray for you.


364 posted on 02/16/2007 6:32:25 PM PST by Kevmo (The first labor of Huntercles: Defeating the 3-headed RINO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
I will pray for you.

Thank you for that. We all can use all the help we can get.

And thank you for an open, honest exchange of views. You've been respectful, intelligent and expressed yourself with clarity. It was an honor to converse with you.

365 posted on 02/16/2007 6:42:14 PM PST by Dominic Harr (Conservative: The "ant", to a liberal's "grasshopper".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: rodomila

Hell will freeze over before I vote for Mitt, McQueeg, or Rudy. I'll vote conservative and if the GOP doesn't want my vote, it'll follow your lead. I'd rather take a bullet than this death of a thousand cuts we're living through.


366 posted on 02/16/2007 9:31:49 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (When personal character isn't relevant to voters or party leaders, Foley happens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Agreed with every word you said BUMP!


367 posted on 02/16/2007 9:40:38 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (When personal character isn't relevant to voters or party leaders, Foley happens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: pissant
. But waht it does mean is that his ascension WILL RIP THE PARTY APART. The Gop cannot afford to veer any farther left or it will lose the most conservative 1/3 of the party for good.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Rudy is a political acident waiting to happen. He left his party affiliation blank in his filing with the Electoral Commission. That means he will run as an independant if he does not get on the PUbbie Ticket, thereby removing the NYC voters from the Pubbie formula.

RUDY MEANS TO SPLIT THE PARTY. Its a threat. So that alone is enough for me to understand that he would make a poor president. Mayoral politics will not work on a national level and we do not need a mayor of the United States.

368 posted on 02/17/2007 5:21:16 PM PST by Candor7 (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
If a candidate who bears a strong resemblance to Dad Walton ("The Waltons") can't get elected President there is something seriously wrong with America.>>>>>>>>>>>>

Maybe you would like to say that to Duncan Hunter's face. He was a LRRP soldier in Vietnam ( Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol....look up what that means.), so I doubt your foray into image destruction will get very far.

369 posted on 02/17/2007 5:34:08 PM PST by Candor7 (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: airborne
Keep the Faith. I am a conservative as well, and often laugh at the pussies on here. Its a source of entertainment.
370 posted on 02/17/2007 5:36:39 PM PST by Candor7 (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr
Nope. I will vote Democrap, and then watch all the RINOs retire. The real Republicans will still be around in 2012.
371 posted on 02/17/2007 5:40:04 PM PST by Candor7 (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Candor7; All
If a candidate who bears a strong resemblance to Dad Walton ("The Waltons") can't get elected President there is something seriously wrong with America.>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe you would like to say that to Duncan Hunter's face. He was a LRRP soldier in Vietnam ( Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol....look up what that means.), so I doubt your foray into image destruction will get very far.

That was intended as a compliment, read my tagline, and "lighten up Francis". Try the decaf!
372 posted on 02/17/2007 7:03:48 PM PST by mkjessup (If Reagan were still with us, he'd ask us to "win one more for the Gipper, vote for Duncan Hunter!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 369 | View Replies]

To: rodomila

Actually I just finished up listening to the congressman on WRKO. He sounded pretty good to me. He answered questions directly.


373 posted on 02/18/2007 4:54:23 PM PST by MSF BU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360361-373 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson