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.
You got that right, LOL!!!
I admitted my errors and took full responsibility for it. Now, why don't you answer my questions instead of avoiding them like a typical liberal does? You need to spend more time trying to persuade conservatives here on why the should vote for a liberal RINO instead of insulting them.
Here are some questions I asked you in my previous post.
"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?"
If you want to avoid answering me I understand because that is pretty much the typical MO of you liberals here. My questions are sincere, answer them or continue to spew out your liberal propaganda on this liberal forum.
Once you do so, I'll be glad to respond.
I'm giving you another chance and try again. I'm not afraid to reply, just stop the attacks.
Typical lib response. Suit yourself.
Thanks for proving my point.
Yes, we certainly do. I'll start and end with illegal immigration and porous borders. There's really nothing else that needs to be said after that.
...how?
It's a cute graphic.
So the Money-Is-God Republicans at the Club for Growth say Hunter does not meet the Reagan myth?
BTTT
Yep. Corporate welfare... 501(c) tax-exempt corporations...
The welfare plantation for illegal invaders...
Here is their boy:
Don’t forget the part where he wore dresses (!) and hung around with mostly guys.
I was a pre-teen in Middle School when it happened. Some of the students got suspended for laughing at the footage.
- YES on Sarbanes-Oxley
- YES on the 2003 Medicare Drug Benefit
- 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.
Ron Paul voted right on each of these issues and Hunter voted wrong. Can anyone here name another candidate who did the same?
No candidate is perfect but Ron Paul (who voted the right way on Medicare, No Child Behind, Pork barrel spending, etc.) comes much closer than Hunter. Moreover, Paul beats or ties Hunter in most polls.
Oh, is Duncan Hunter a Nazi as well?
Like how Jimmy Carter isn't a Nazi either.
It is not necessary for Duncan Hunter to be compared to Ronald Reagan. Duncan Hunter is his own man. He is well equipped - (26 successful years in Congress; a good family man; highly principled; articulate (dare I use that word?); an advocate of peace through strength; a war hero - among many other reasons) - to be Pilot of this Ship of State. Ronald Reagan was a big spender, but he was also other important and necessary things. So is Duncan Hunter.
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.