Posted on 10/11/2007 9:28:30 AM PDT by pissant
If you knew his history, you would know he is by far the best candidate we have had since Reagan. The fact that he is still fairly obscure does not change that. He will not be obscure for long.
LLS
He showed that he has a good grasp of the economic facts, but there was none of that fire that Republicans crave to see in their standard bearer.
...and then goes on to shill for Duncan't??? The guy is about as exciting as watching paint dry! Sheesh!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1909679/posts
Duncan Hunter Events Notice - CPAC, Hunter's Radio
Excerpt:
Congressman Hunter will be the guest speaker at Saturday's dinner event during this weekend's Western Conservative Political Action Conference at the Fairmont Hotel in Newport Beach, California.
Mike Reagan, General Chairman, CPAC
Who are the "conservatives" of whom Mr. Reagan speaks? On what basis does Mr. Reagan claim to speak for "the majority" of them?
It's an easy, mushy little phrase that allows him to attribute a particular opinion to a group that has no practical existence.
Lazy, lazy punditry. Mr. Reagan is expressing his own opinion, which is fine. The problem comes when he tries to pass his opinion of as being that of "the majority of conservatives," which is presumptuous at best.
Related:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1909584/posts
Duncan Hunter with Michael Reagan, Oct 10, 2007 (audio)
Good one!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rq3PVHVn0kE
We didn’t start the fire - Billy Joel
Even Better!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRlj5vjp3Ko
Ring of Fire 1963
Not really. the reason there is a pretty big muddle with no one polling over 25% is that none of the frontrunners have excited the base. Soon to change.
The globalists have come this far and they aren't about to allow somebody like Duncan Hunter to upset their carefully laid plans. I'm not at all certain they will regret destroying this country to make a quick buck. They have nurtured the rise of China as the future dominant power and now they are on the verge of finishing us off not just as an economic power, but also as a military power. It's not just that our globalists have sold us out, but the globalists have sold out all of western civilization. I have no idea why they have such trust in the Chinese to stake their very lives and existence on them, but they have. I can't write that off as just greed. It's one thing to sell the rest of us out, but I suspect they have something going that has already bought their protection and survival long term.
>>>>So I guess the way to set yourself apart during a debate is to spout half-baked protectionism while proclaiming your commitment to free trade.
If you are actually interested, Duncan Hunter AND Michael Reagan both address the protectionism comments in this interview.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1909783/posts?page=26#26
She needs to publicly apologize to FRed for dissing him on air like that.
LOL. You have Fred and Rudy um and uh and muddle their way through answers and Hunter in full commanding voice and being succinct, and Hunter is the paint dry guy? that’s funny.
Did you forget that he talks to conservatives day in and day out on his program? I would guess he has a fairly good grasp of what conservatives are thinking. At least he's in a position to judge their thinking a lot better than you are.
bttt
Haiti was trying to ride the China wave too.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1896155/posts?page=9#9
Listened to both segments last night. Great interview of a great candidate. I encourage everyone to take the time to listen to a real Reagan conservative. Times awasting folks.
Indeed. thank you Michael.
Exceedingly OLD repeat of established facts.
I'd be interested in hearing what it is that will cause this to change soon -- is it just a matter of normal folks beginning to pay attention, or are you suggesting that some watershed moment will separate the wheat from the chaff?
As for your comment ... I don't think "the base" (i.e., Republican voters who aren't otherwise active in politics) is even paying attention to this third-rate circus.
I think what we see in the polling right now reflects the positions of politically active folks who are hunting around for whichever candidate achieves the proper balance between ideological purity and practical electability.
BTW, my original comment really had to do only with what I see as the epitome of lazy punditry -- that of claiming to speak for some large, amorphous group. That kind of claim generally causes me to lose interest in anything the pundit has to say afterwards.
are you kidding? ann NEVER apologizes. didn’t she refer to Harriet Miers as a cleaning lady and to President Bush as a drunk around that same time? I don’t care if she apologizes or not. but since she has admitted Duncan Hunter can’t get the nomination, and that it is between Rudy and Romney, i don’t know how she, as a conservative, is going to reconcile either of those, while turning her nose up at Fred.
I’m pulling for Hunter to get traction, but Americans don’t want leadership, they want a sugar daddy (or Mommy).
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.