familyop wrote: “I’ve been flamed quite a few times for posting the facts.”
Me too:
*
The Club for Growth’s Andrew Roth:
“Like most Republicans, [Duncan Hunter is] 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.”
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2006/10/duncan_hunters_voting_record.php
*
“...This explains why Duncan Hunter isn’t gaining any traction; his record on fiscal issues is that of something other than a conservative.”
http://race42008.com/2007/03/24/fiscally-fisking-the-2008-contenders/
*
Hunter needs to raise tens of millions of dollars over the next year to boost his profile among conservative activists, say experienced political hands. That effort could be complicated by the opposition of influential power brokers because of Hunter’s long history of opposing free-trade deals and promoting tough border security policies.
Other top Republicans decry what they consider Hunter’s indifferent record on the effort to curb extravagant federal spending.
“Our (political action committee) would cross him off the list,” said David Keating, executive director of the fiscally conservative Club for Growth. “We wouldn’t even consider endorsing him because his record on fiscal issues has been so bad.”
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20061226-9999-1n26hunter.html
*
Why do you suppose some black helicopter folks are so upset about Fred being a member of a state department advisory council? I guess having a president who is knowledgeable about nuclear arms proliferation and foreign affairs is a bad thing, huh?
Odd, that.