Posted on 03/09/2007 6:44:43 PM PST by LdSentinal
Periodically, I get e-mails from supporters of the presidential candidacy of Alpine Rep. Duncan Hunter who express disbelief, befuddlement or fury, or a mix of all three, at my flat contention that he is a populist demagogue and anything but a principled conservative. These folks cannot fathom any talk that he's not free-trade, small-government Ronald Reagan reincarnated.
Here's a typical example of Hunterista reaction to my comment that he's been against trade deals that have been important boons to our economy:
You're supposed to be a columnist, an informed person. This is not an informed statement.
OK. If you don't believe me about Duncan Hunter's RRRINOitis, here's what the influential, admired-and-respected-in-conservative-circles Club for Growth has to say about him:
Like most Republicans, he's strong on tax cuts, but he's been part of the big government spending spree of the last 6 years. He also has a protectionist streak in him. Here are some of the more troubling votes:
NO on NAFTA YES on No Child Left Behind YES on Sarbanes-Oxley YES on the 2003 Medicare Drug Benefit NO on CAFTA YES on 2005 Highway Bill YES on the 527 bill (like most Republicans, he flip-flopped, having first voted NO on McCain-Feingold) Hunter also went 0 for 19 on the Flake anti-pork amendments.
Despite being a member of the Republican Study Committee, Hunter frequently votes NO on their fiscally conservative annual budgets (2006, 2005, 2003...)
We gave him a 49% on the 2005 Club for Growth scorecard. That places him 187th within the House GOP conference, out of roughly 230 members.
National Taxpayers Union shows a more telling trend. He was strong in the early 1990s, getting "B's" and one "A", but as time went by, like most politicians, his score dropped. For the past few years, he's been getting "C's".
Those Cs are incredibly generous. As CATO noted last year, with Duncan Hunter cheering him on ...
... President Bush has presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal spending since Lyndon B. Johnson. Even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, Bush is still the biggest-spending president in 30 years. His 2006 budget doesn't cut enough spending to change his place in history, either.
Total government spending grew by 33 percent during Bush's first term. The federal budget as a share of the economy grew from 18.5 percent of GDP on Clinton's last day in office to 20.3 percent by the end of Bush's first term.
The Republican Congress has enthusiastically assisted the budget bloat. Inflation-adjusted spending on the combined budgets of the 101 largest programs they vowed to eliminate in 1995 has grown by 27 percent.
The GOP was once effective at controlling nondefense spending. The final nondefense budgets under Clinton were a combined $57 billion smaller than what he proposed from 1996 to 2001. Under Bush, Congress passed budgets that spent a total of $91 billion more than the president requested for domestic programs.
And as bad as things are on the budget front, they're about to get a whole lot worse because of a pending nightmare that Duncan Hunter -- supposed tough guy, supposed truth-teller, supposed fiscal conservative -- has chosen to ignore. To borrow from what I wrote last year ...
... the single worst problem facing this country in coming years, with the possible exception of nuclear terrorism, is dealing with the massive fiscal impact of baby boomers retiring. As we slowly transition from a nation where there are 4 working adults for every adult getting Social Security and Medicare to a nation where that ratio is 2 to 1, we will face an incredible fiscal squeeze.
As a veteran member of Congress, Duncan Hunter knows this. He's heard the warnings, seen the bipartisan studies. So what did this self-declared fiscal conservative do in 2003? He voted to make the problem much, much, much worse by extending prescription drug benefits to seniors, three-quarters of whom already have coverage. The money that was saved by all the triumphant stands he claims to have taken is infinitesimal compared to the staggering long-term national debt he helped add with this one vote, which was tantamount to civic arson.
Yeah, right, our Duncan's a fiscal conservative. ... He loves spending your grandkids' money, and by the truckload.
Duncan Hunter is no Ronald Reagan. To those who say Ronald Reagan really wasn't Ronald Reagan -- that government didn't get smaller when he was president -- well, he tried harder than any president in modern times to get Congress to control spending and wipe out whole government agencies. By contrast, Hunter and the GOP Congress of 2001-2006 kept the national credit cards hanging on a string around their necks for easy and constant use.
"..if someone didn't witness first-hand what he achieved in NYC, and the battles that were fought to get there, they really can't ever understand who he is. .."
Tell that to preborn babies who burned to death from saline in earlier abortions, or get ripped apart from partial-birth abortions.
Here is a little civics lesson CONGRESS PASSES THE LAW!!! CONGRESS PASSES THE BUDGET!!!! THE PRESIDENT SIGNS OR VETOS THE LAWS!!! THE PRESIDENT SIGNS OR VETOS THE BUDGET!!!! That is how it works.. Hunter is good at passing laws and passing budgets.. Not a good sign for someone to be an Executive. Also is to warm cozy with the unions..
Well if Roe vs Wade is overturned, the issue of abortion is going to be decided by state by state again.. As it should....
Hmmmmm ..?? How do you wear a "suite" ..??
John Hawkins: Would you like to see Roe v. Wade overturned?
Duncan Hunter: Yes. You know, I'm the author of the personhood-at-conception bill which right now has over 100 co-sponsors ...that would define personhood as moment of conception, so, it would allow us to have a reversal of the effects of Roe v. Wade without a constitutional amendment.
http://www.rightnation.us/forums/index.php?showtopic=114155
Didn't some people lose the past election cause of this???
A lot of the Defense company guys do NOT like Hunter and no, they are NOT the BIG MONEY GUYS anyway.
Hunter will be lucky to still be breathing ( in a political way ) next February 20th. He'll still be on the bottom of the barrel and nobody will be leaving the top tier guys.
Your wishful thinking is in complete discord with reality.
Even if he does win, he is going to get his butt handed to him in the national election...
The unions love that.
***So the blue collar democrats who vote their pocket books might vote for him? That proves that he has wide appeal. The illegal immigration thing is another one with wide appeal across party lines. Prop 187 passed in caleefornia with heavy MSM drumbeating against it, low polls, liberal electorate, and it passed with a good margin. When you have the right approach to issues that resonate, you win elections. Rudy has the wrong approach to issues that resonate with the socon base, so he splits the base. Then he's going to go after the same middle ground voters that Hillary owns, and as soon as the MSM turns on him he won't even have Bob Dole's numbers.
Which is better for the party, [win or lose the election] a republican who splits the base (perhaps permanently) or one who solidifies the base and draws middle class crossover votes?
Who do you support for POTUS, sir?
Here's more of why I like DUNCAN HUNTER:
DUNCAN HUNTER announcement speech
"China is cheating on trade. They are piling up over 200 billion U.S. dollars each year as a result and they are buying ships, planes and missiles with American trade dollars.
They have purchased Russian Sovreignny Class missile cruisers designed to destroy American aircraft carriers.
They have built between 750 and 1,000 medium range ballistic missiles and they have 17 submarines under construction.
How are they cheating? China gives 17% tax rebate to their exporters and a 17% penalty to our businesses who export to them. In addition, they maintain a 40% currency devaluation just to make sure the U.S. business doesn’t win.
This is not free trade. This is not fair trade. It’s cheating and if we put up with it, then we are disserving not only business and workers, but also our security.
If this was a football game, it means China has put 74 points on the score board before the opening kick-off.
Our own head of the Federal Reserve Board, Mr. Bernanke, went to China a few weeks ago and wrote a speech describing China’s currency manipulation as a “subsidy.” Then he pulled those words out so as not to anger his Communist hosts.
I thought Republicans didn’t believe in appeasing Communists.
This isn’t a game. It is pulling apart American’s Arsenal of Democracy which has saved the world three times in the last century and will be called on to do so again.
As President, I will make sure that our businesses and workers get a level playing field. I will do this because our security is at stake."
excerpt: http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2008/hunter/hunter012507sp.html
The general public can't contact the Hunter for President campaign through e-mail. It's snail mail only unless you are part of the media.
Yes, they did.
Then if Hunter had any smarts why in the heck did he choose someone associated with Abramoff(sp)???
Troublemarker! :-)
Don't you know Duncan Hunter walks on water and the sun shines out of his...well never mind
There is an new rule for Free Republic.. Thou shall not question Duncan Hunter...
The fetus at 20 weeks gestation "is fully capable of experiencing pain. … Without question, all of this is a dreadfully painful experience for any infant subjected to such a surgical procedure." — Robert J. White, M.D., PhD., professor of neurosurgery at Case Western University, Cleveland, Ohio, in testimony before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, March 21, 1996
DD 214 ;^)
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.