Posted on 01/31/2007 8:46:24 AM PST by Antoninus
The links do little to help you make your case. Of the six threads you linked ONE had any significant notice with 103 replys. I did not count how many of them were from you. Half of them were OVER a year old. So there was NO significant interest in or recognition of Hunter even here.
I doubt anyone would consider 3 threads last year, one the year before and two from TWO years ago constitutes anything more than a handful. However, I will increase my donation to FR anyway.
1880 but Garfield was also an ex-major general from the Civil War.
Quit sounding like a Demonrat trying to change the subject. You are SO obvious! That was not what you said in your challenge. You wanted threads about Hunter and I provided them. Hunter has been an important Chairman and has played more than a minor role contrary to your attacks and oblivion.
It's one thing to miss a couple points. It's another to miss just about every one.
But for pointing that out about Rudy, we're fanatics?
Fooey.
Well, Bunny Slippers was mentioning the mission statement for FR.
What part of it to you denotes "fanaticism?"
Are you calling JimRob a fanatic for writing it?
And answer the question when a man only elected mayor was last elected Pres if you will? If Rudy is so electable why didn't he run against Hillary for Senate either time? Hmmm??? I like Rudy but not as President. His stances on too many issues is in sharing the Clintoon's viewpoint and didn't Rudy endorse Clintoon in '96? Not many good things in his favor frankly.
Anyone but a jerk could see that my point was entirely correct and links to three threads last year, ONE from the year before and two from two years ago do not invalidate ANYTHING I said.
"...his specialty is drive-by postings filled with ignorance,..." you are a RAT faced LIAR. Any time I get in a thread I often post dozens of times. You cannot show any time I have posted and run.
"...coupled with a smug persona of thinking he knows more than anybody else on FR." Who would not be smug debating with lamebrains like you who believe you can LIE your way to the truth. Body slam? Even those as delusional as you will see what a real body slam is when Hunter does not win ONE primary and gets out of single figures in MAYBE a couple.
BTW I contribute monthly to FR do you? And hot air and bluster doesn't count.
You asked for more than a handful of threads prior to Nov. on Duncan Hunter because you say that he is a nobody and was not known whatsoever. [That is NOT what I said.]
Well, I provide you with evidence and you have nothing to say for your ignorance. [Your "evidence" confirmed exactly what I said. Two posts per year for three years is not more than a handful and only one of those attract any interest.]
Why were there even threads, ANYTHING written about Duncan Hunter if he was really just a nobody?? [You cannot be serious with that question. There are threads all the time which are interesting only to the one creating them. I never called Hunter a "nobody" in any case merely pointed out that he was about as unknown as a Congressman can be. You have NOT shown that to be false.]
I made no "wager" I said I would contribute another $10 to FR and rather than quibble about the meaning of a handful I will do so. It isn't like contributing money to the DNC so I don't mind.
Quit sounding like a Demonrat trying to change the subject. You are SO obvious! [Why are you lying, I have not changed the subject.]
You wanted threads about Hunter and I provided them. [And the pitiful number of them proved my point which is worth the $10.] Hunter has been an important Chairman [He is perhaps the most Unknown "important Chairman I have ever seen] and has played more than a minor role contrary to your attacks and oblivion. [Yet more LIES I never spoke of his role or its importance. All Congressmen have a major role to play and I do not blame Hunter for not becoming a Publicity Hound like so many of them. It is not my "oblivion" you have to worry about but the fact that the Electorate is oblivious of Hunter's existence.]
I have no problem with those pointing out any candidate's flaws. I only have a problem with those who pretend a candidate with 1% of the vote in most polls if that can win the nomination. What makes a fanatic is BELIEVING such things. Only the wildly unrealistic fanaticism is dangerous.
You got that right.
Here we have RINO John Warner joining in with Levin and Hagel on a compromise resolution to bash the Iraq war plan. Harry Reid got on the Senate floor last night and praised Warner to the skies.
Warner has no idea what he has unleashed. Whether or not in VA, I don't know and think probably not. But in the base, nationally. This is the kind of thing Duncan Hunter can stand up to and turn around. I for one am looking for that leadership. So are a bunch of others from what I've seen.
Also, Senator Jon Kyl was on Fox and CNN letting the other Senators have it, in a firm but classy way as is his style.
Where have you ever seen me say name recognition is everything? There is a huge difference between fame and infamy. There is a huge difference between name recognition for accomplishment and name recognition for vapidity and sluttiness.
Hillary has more name recognition than ANY potential candidate but it won't be enough to win the election.
However, overcoming the LACK of name recognition is the most serious obstancle to ANY candidate not just Hunter. It is just a BIGGER obstacle for him than most.
But you know all this and prefer to play games.
I am pointing out the silliness of the name recognition game when name recognition is not tethered to values that can hold the GOP together.
When did you stop beating your wife? Don't say you never beat her since my question is just as relevant as you implying I called JR a "fanatic". Obviously I was not speaking of JR in any way. Why would I contribute monthly to a site run by a fanatic?
Any honest person would have never tried such a pathetic and sleazy slander.
Naw, a poster just said that few people could meet all those points, and you implied that anyone who did was a fanatic.
"Fanaticism Uber Alles is the slogan of the Implacables."
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."
And answer the question when a man only elected mayor was last elected Pres if you will? [Never has been a case of that. It is a bit of an obstacle for Rudy. However, great leaders can overcome such things. Historical precedent gets overcome from time to time. But since NYC is bigger than most states and more complicated than ANY state its mayorality is much like being a governor. Executive ability and experience is the real issue with the "congressmen/Senators do not get elected President" concern.
Jimmy Madison was elected President after only serving in the House and never being a governor. Unfortunately I don't see Hunter as a Madison.]
If Rudy is so electable why didn't he run against Hillary for Senate either time? [First time Rudy had to deal with cancer. But he will run stronger against Hillary in the rest of the country anyway than he would have in NY. I don't think he is a Legislator as much as a leader in any case.]
His stances on too many issues is in sharing the Clintoon's viewpoint and didn't Rudy endorse Clintoon in '96? [1 not the stances I have been hearing him articulate, 2 I have never heard that claim but Zell Miller campaigned for the guy and he is a hero to many here.]
What is in RG's favor is his brilliance, eloquence, toughness, determination and leadership ability.
Never have I said to vote for ANYONE because of name recognition and you know it. I have pointed out the obvious fact that without it one has little chance of getting elected to a major office. Those are FAR different things.
No I did not.
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.