Posted on 02/19/2007 10:08:20 AM PST by Clintonfatigued
Me, too.
This discussion reminds me of an anecdote about Winston Churchill.
He was verbally attacked by a woman at a dinner party who complained that he was drunk.
He said some thing like, "Madame, when I wake up tomorrow morning, I will be sober, but you will still be fat."
No matter what changes DH makes, they will still only post the worst pics they can find.
Like you, I think he looks just FINE. And I bet our troops think so, too.
PS ~
I think Hunter's principles are pretty well buttoned up, don't you?
And he invites anyone to examine his records with a fine tooth comb.
Check out this thread with a link to a great radio interview he did. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1787348/posts
Check out his official site at http://www.gohunter08.com
And Hunter at his best:
Just some background info on Hunter and his outspoken nature to go where not many(I don't think any) Republicans go with their spineless nature.
Hunter on Abu Ghraib(courtesyhttp://www.larouchepub.com/other/2004/3128goss_hunter_block.html : )
Probably the single loudest obstructionist voice in the House of Representatives in support of the Cheneyac "Beastman" policy in Iraq has been Armed Services Committee chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.). Hunter has been able to use his position to block any meaningful inquiry into the Abu Ghraib prison scandal and at every public opportunity, has railed against those who are demanding such an investigation. He even went after his GOP counterpart in the Senate, John Warner (Va.), for holding three hearings in two weeks on the scandal, practically accusing Warner of treason.
Under great public pressure, Hunter has since held one hearing, for part of one day, and has no intention of having any more. During debate on the Fiscal Year 2005 Defense Authorization bill, on May 19, Hunter declared, "We have had enormous publicity the last number of days about the mess at Abu Ghraib. I estimated we have probably devoted as much media attention to that mess involving now, as identified, some seven personnel, as we did to the Normandy invasion. And that is an imbalance. It is time to refocus." What did he want to refocus on? "The 135,000 great personnel doing their job in Iraq."
On June 14, when the committee took up a resolution of inquiry sponsored by some 40 Democrats, demanding the Pentagon be more forthcoming with documents relating to the prison scandal, Hunter placed the 6,000 pages of the report on the abuse and torture of prisoners filed by U.S. Army General Anthony Taguba (the Taguba Report) on a table at the head of the hearing room and railed at the Democrats, "Isn't that enough for you?"
Hunter on Guantanamo(courtesy http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050613-033125-4935r.htm:)
California Republican Duncan Hunter held a press conference to discuss the treatment of detainees at the island jail, and spent his opening statement going over a daily menu for prisoners that included oven-fried chicken and fresh fruit.
"This is what Osama bin Laden's bodyguards will eat several times a week. Lemon chicken, rice, broccoli, carrots, bread and two types of fruit," Hunter said, inviting a reporter to come eat with him.
Hunter was digging himself out of small hole he got into over the weekend when he said on a news program that the White House is divided over whether to close the jail.
"I think they've come to the conclusion, some members of the White House have come to the conclusion that the legend now, that the legend is different than the fact, and when that's the case you go with the legend that somehow Guantanamo has been a place of abuse and you close it down and you shorten the stories, you shorten the heated debate and you get it off the table and you move on," he said.
You really need to try an image makeover yourself, sweetheart. You just exude anger. Ok, we get it, you say Hunter doesn't have a chance. You'd think you'd chill a bit and be happy with such a thing?! Instead, you cannot resist the Hunter threads! I'm from NY. Rudy should've run for Senator. He's not meant to be President.
You said it ~ petty,
not to mention shallow, transparent & desperate.
Looks like its working for China, and the EU. They are sustaining it so well, in fact, that when their subsidized dumping of steel was conclusively proven, they used their 52-to-1 political bloc in the WTO to basically IGNORE the facts, rule the U.S. violating the trade rules, and gave the EU the "cover" to start plotting their further sanctions. Since the whole thing was prompted by their violations, their bluff should have been called.
Where was the courage to say "Bring it on!"?
The phoney free traders are simply shills for the import lobbies. I have never once seen them stand up for countering foreign GOVERNMENTAL interference in our markets.
I agree. Thank you for noticing.
And this was also a pleasant surprise during my search for that particular photo:
This is from the caption on the statue of Mcaulliffe from the Bastogne city web site:
This monument is dedicated to the memory of General McAuliffe, who valorously defended the City in 1944. The sculpture is the work of Ms Silvercruys, the sister of the Belgian Ambassador to the United States at the time. The General himself inaugurated the monument. In 1947, the Square was renamed after McAuliffe. A short time later, at a session held on 3rd March 1947, the Communal Council unanimously conferred on the General the title of honorary citizen of the City of Bastogne. The General in question, held in high esteem by whole the people of Bastogne for his great human qualities, died in 1975.
We just don't agree on the facts. You account appears to me to be fictional, but hey, I have been wrong before.
Excellent listing of some of the direct honesty we see from Hunter! Thanks!
And you are again. The U.S. had the evidentiary goods.
But they were blown off, completely glossed over...and ignored.
This is the fruit of trusting an international body stacked against the U.S...the WTO... to be a fair arbiter of the playing field.
Your claims that the U.S. steel tariffs were a "disaster" was steel-import lobbyist-paid-for propaganda. And think this through...if U.S. "Steel consumers"...in the MOST COMPETITIVE STEEL MARKET ON THE PLANET [And that was after the tariffs were in place] needed subsidized, dumped steel, to remain competitive in their fields...how secure a position was that? If they couldn't survive without an ephemeral non-market-based advantage...which has proved fleeting in any event...then they were already dead for all practical purposes.
The independent U.S. integrated steel industry (not the mini-mills, btw), contrary to Congressional liberals and their tame CBO analysis, is vital to the U.S. Defense. George Bush clearly appreciated that...recognized the cascade the collapse of our vertical steel industry represented to countless capacities...and acted like a patriot.
The WTO bylaws explicitly guaranteed the right to protect an industry from destruction. And that was indeed the clear intent...and practical effect...of the foreign subsidies. The USITC made a clear, undeniable legal case.
As the USITC Commissioner pointed out:
We refrained from imposing provisional relief while the U.S. International Trade Commission's [USITC] investigation was under way. Instead, the USITC painstakingly developed a voluminous factual record and unanimously determined, after a lengthy, transparent investigation, that increased steel imports caused or threatened to cause serious injury to specific segments of the U.S. steel industry.Which the EU, Japan and China could have debated in our courts. But they chose the WTO, where they had their majority stacked...which didn't even look at the evidence.
The WTO ruling of illegality...was hence Illegal in its own right.
I see an lot of assertions, but no facts. Maybe you might think about linking to some source of hard information, from a non-biased source. I thought Bush's steel tariffs, were awful at the time he proposed them, and considered myself vindicated. It almost cost him the presidency, since Ohio was hurt economically. Bush thought it would bag him Pennsylvania, which is why he did it, IMO. It was all Rovian politics. How wrong he was.
That is the case of the WTO. All raw assertion, no facts. The USITC report, on the other hand was solid facts. The U.S. lost 30 steel companies to bankruptcy. The remaining ones were teetering. And the Bylaws of the WTO were explicit. We were entitled as a matter of law therein to protect the industry from subsidized attack.
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.