Duncan Hunter, RRRINO: Reincarnated Reagan Republican In Name Only

SignsonSanDiego.com ^ | 3/9/07 | Chris Reed

[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.

[FreeReign]

A real deep thinker.

Apparently, he ran out of time. LOL!

[CWOJackson]

The have meter's on them now? A shame someone didn't come along and put another nickel in.

[pollyannaish]

Keep working on the civility thing. FWIW, for me it helps if I don't automatically assume exactly what kind of conservative other folks are. I work on understanding how I fit into conservatism. Then I look for allies where my criteria match up with other's criteria and work on building coalitions.

I've found that labeling everyone else as different from myself simply alienates potential allies. Looking for commonality helps me (and us) achieve conservative goals. Takes a lot more patience, delayed gratification and tongue biting (and I'll tell you, I've failed a million and one times!)...but it does the job in the end. As they always say, he who laughs last, laughs best.

As contentious as the arena can get, in the end, we are all forced to give a little to take a little. It's frustrating, slow, hard work, but in the end it's immensely rewarding. Ok, that and the times when we're all working together to publicly declare the DIFFERENCES we have with the loony left. :-)

Anyway, good luck!

[Victoria Delsoul]

Is it too much effort to type social conservative and social liberal? Why the socon and solib?

Which candidate is best for the republican party, Side A or Side B?

Do I look like an idiot to you? LOL!

You create a false choice in your hypothetical and expect me to pick one?

Let me just address this, which pretty much covers everything:

My contention: If rudy gets the nomination, he loses the base and the election.

No, he doesn't. He has 84% of conservative support. In other words, the GOP base is giving him 84% of support - that makes you and your buddies in the 16% minority. That isn't splitting the base by any means. There are polls after polls indicating this. All those polls (and there are many) can't be wrong, and they all indicate strong support for Rudy by the conservative base, even in the South where his naysayers have predicted doom and gloom for a long time.

So no, if Rudy gets the nomination, he doesn't lose the base, and he is a favorite to win the election.

[Victoria Delsoul]

That's a personal attack. Which proves my point that team rudy is not polite. Keep up the good work, you guys make it easy to win supporters by just being yourselves.

LOL! Who is the one posting to me on post #537 using words like “tootyfruity?” who maligned me as social liberal, or as you call it 'solib,' and accused me of being part of a cult of personality that emphasizes my “social liberal” values more than anything else in an effort to split the party? And after you insulted me and accused me of being a liberal, you proclaimed that: Folks like you are doing REAL damage to the republican party and I doubt your loyalty to it.

And you come here crying that I am not being polite? With the insults and accusations you have made against me, despite not knowing me very well (otherwise you wouldn't have posted that), I've been very polite to you considering the tripe you posted earlier. It's the anti-Rudy's that are the ones bringing people to our side with their insults and attacks.

[Dog Gone]

You don't even know the definition of what a straw argument is. You use it as an insult for arguments you don't like.

You think I'm stupid, and I think you're stupid. I'm not sure that accomplishes anything, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

I never promised to leave this thread, so I'm hardly breaking my word. You certainly have an overactive imagination, which probably is also why you think Hunter has a chance at gaining the nomination.

[Cold Heat]

***Then why waste your time on these threads? Methinks the ladies doth protest too much. And the fact that we're pushing a socon candidate on a socon forum and you questionables are pushing some kind of solib candidate in the name of compromise almost a year before the primaries tends to make this socon wonder what you're doing here on this socon forum other than being a provocateur.

Just who is provoking who!

Keep it up....

What happened last November will only be the beginning of a political self immolation that breaks every record in the book.

[dmw]

"It's the anti-Rudy's that are the ones bringing people to our side with their insults and attacks."

So, people who get their *feelings* hurt from the "anti-Rudys" "bringing people over to your side" to support Rudy. That's deep. And you wonder why the liberal label gets attached to you. Conservatives don't let their feelings get in the way of, or compromise their principles and convictions, but sensitive *feelers* do. Not a very convincing argument to join the Rudy camp if you ask me.

Other than the "fact" that Rudy is the only candidate who can win the WOT, why are you personally so determined to support a liberal candidate this early in the game? What sold you on Rudy, and why aren't you more open to supporting a conservative candidate? Suppose Fred Thompson gets in, could you support him? Remember, while you like to emphasize Rudy's high poll numbers (from the MSM no less), this forum is a conservative forum, and the majority of us here on this forum do not support RINO's, like Rudy. If you and the rest of your Rudy supporters are having a hard time dealing with those of us who find it perplexing, and downright repulsive, that FReepers here would support a liberal candidate, then you are going to be spending an awful lot of time reading negative, and yes, sometimes insulting comments. Your side has shown themselves to be quite vicious at times with their insults and ridicule too, so don't try to claim the moral high ground here, because you can't.

You said, "Folks like you are doing REAL damage to the republican party and I doubt your loyalty to it." You've been here long enough to know that this is not a republican forum, it's a conservative forum. Jim Robinson, and the majority of us here on FR, don't have loyalties to the republican party, that's not what it's about here, so why even inject this into the conversation? We are not concerned about damaging the republican party (nor should we be). However, the republican party should be concerned about the damage THEY are doing by veering to the left and abandoning it's principles. We aren't here to promote the republican agenda, we are here to promote the conservative agenda. If you don't know that by now then I suggest you go and read Jim Robinson's statement of purpose on the home page.

If you've read any of Jim's posts here lately you would know that, not only does he not support Rudy (who he considers to be quite liberal), he doesn't understand why anyone who calls themselves a conservative would support Rudy either. That's pretty much expresses the sentiments of the majority of us here. Now, I know you like to quote those wonderful MSM polls that show Rudy's high numbers, but that doesn't prove anything, except that there are a lot of ignorant people out there (and here) who are willing to compromise their principles (assuming they have any) to support someone that is *popular*, regardless how liberal he is.

Based on your comment, Jim Robinson and those of us who aren't loyal to the republican is doing real damage to the party. Do you really think so? Well, as Jim has often said, "we haven't left the republican party, they left us". Damage is being done alright, but it is not us who is doing the damage. If Rudy gets nominated, there will be a lot of damage done to the conservative cause and it will take years to undo it. Not to mention, supporting Rudy almost guarantees that Hillary is going to become the next POTUS. And if that happens, you've got no one to blame but yourself.

[dmw]

I apologize for the numerous errors in my post above. I should have spent more time proofing it. I'm calling it a day--good night!

[Kevmo]

I'm not falling for you one-man circle jerk. Post #383 isn't even within the ViewReplies continuity of #430. You've been shown to be wrong. You said that I was classless, so I would expect you to apologize for your postings, withdraw your contentions, and agree to be polite. But, of course, that would be the classy thing to do.

[Kevmo]

Instead of big words, let's start with small words. Like RRRINO, in the title. Show me which of the republican platforms Duncan Hunter disregards when he votes for such things as what President Bush asks for. If he's staying within the platform, how is he a RINO?

[Kevmo]

Why don't you guys get a room? Or use freepmail. What a bunch of clucking chickens.

[nopardons]

Jim was NOT for "W", from '98 through early September of 2000.

He was as adamantly against him, as he now is against Rudy.

And we all know how THAT worked out' don't we? :-)

[Kevmo]

The 2 polls on Free Republic put forth an obvious SOCON (only Hunter fits that description given) versus a SOLIB (it certainly fits rudy).
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=171
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=172

Rudy splits the base.


And yes, I expect rudy supporters to answer the false dilemma because there have certainly been enough of them asking the false dilemma of "who would you vote for, Hildebeast or Rudy". So if you don't like them, don't ask them, and get yer buddies to stop asking them. In particular, since this is a socon forum (not even a GOP forum), it is very impolite to ask double-bind questions, expecially this early in the race.

[Kevmo]

I can say what I want about your candidate. He IS a tootyfruity solib candidate. But what you were saying was about me, that's a personal attack, and you're lucky JimRob doesn't ban yer behind. If you don't know the difference between using snarky nicknames for candidates (like RRRINO -- check the title fer gawdsakes or big-spender or cross-dresser or slob or 1%er or liberal) and dropping personal attacks against other freepers, then you won't last long and it will be a big mystery to you why. So pipe down.

[Sun]

It was great talking with you, too.

[Kevmo]

If you're too lazy to do your own research, just say so.


One of a thousand places on the internet where it's defined:

http://www.comdis.wisc.edu/staff/mrchial/PMT%20pdfs/PMT%20Debate.pdf

Knock yourself out.

[Kevmo]

thanks for the post. I think it should be clarified that I was the one who said real damage was being done, not the other side...


You said, "Folks like you are doing REAL damage to the republican party and I doubt your loyalty to it." You've been here long enough to know that this is not a republican forum, it's a conservative forum. Jim Robinson, and the majority of us here on FR, don't have loyalties to the republican party, that's not what it's about here, so why even inject this into the conversation? We are not concerned about damaging the republican party (nor should we be). However, the republican party should be concerned about the damage THEY are doing by veering to the left and abandoning it's principles. We aren't here to promote the republican agenda, we are here to promote the conservative agenda. If you don't know that by now then I suggest you go and read Jim Robinson's statement of purpose on the home page.

[FreeReign]

I'm not falling for you one-man circle jerk.

No. The circle jerk is yours, kevmo.

AuntB Post #387 to FreeReignSiding with the democrats now??? How telling.

FreeReign Post #430 to AuntB:BTW, criticism of the Rudy charity speech is featured prominately at the the Democrat website. How telling that you side with them.

Kevmo Post #526 to FreeReign:Here's what the demos have to say about our front runners. Interesting you should be on the same side as them.

FreReign Post #532 to Kevmo:I simply mention Hunter's spending problem and defend Rudy for giving 80K to Tsunami victims. And you post the above remark to me (about siding with the Democrats).

Kevmo Post #571 to FreeReign:It's basically saying the same thing as you, but I didn't have access to the exact language at the time of the post so I proceeded from memory. If you have a problem with it, then you have a problem with what you said yourself.

The irony of you post #571 still remains far above your (LOL!) flat head, kevmo.

[FreeReign]

Last I checked, this is a "conservative" forum. That would include all things conservative such standing up against big government spending, and 1A encroachments. Most of the comments on this thread about Hunter and his spending and 1A problems are appropriate.

Instead of big words, let's start with small words. Like RRRINO, in the title. Show me which of the republican platforms Duncan Hunter disregards when he votes for such things as what President Bush asks for. If he's staying within the platform, how is he a RINO?

I never called Hunter a RINO. I did however say that he was a big government spender and he had 1A problems.