Some days ago circulating on FR there was an article about Patty “Moron” Murray supporting the Navy building a boat that the Navy didn’t want (I posted it). In the several postings were some references to Duncan Hunter supporting a $63 million plane that doesn’t fly. Now, I like Duncan Hunter but these references concern me especially when I’m telling others to take a look at him since he’s a viable candidate. Do you know of anyone that explain this? See below for the references posted about the airplane:
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/06/hunters_folly_6.html
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/06/new_video_of_pl.html
Yes, that has been discussed ad naseum in a couple of older threads. I’ll try to find the links for you when I get time. It’s nonsensical.
>Can you explain this?<
Sure! Anyone who is about to break into high gear in this presidential race is fair game as far as our moderate or worse (RINO) FR members are concerned.
Conservatives offer absolutely no argument that Duncan Hunter is the Statesman they want to occupy 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
That 63 million was spread over quite a few years so in the world of Military R&D it’s a mere pittance. That’s the world of R&D, sometimes it doesn’t work. What the Navy does and doesn’t want is not always what is best. The brass at the pentagon say a lot of things. I take it all on a case by case basis.