Well "Scholar" you clearly have done very little in the "scholaring" department.
Please present those candidates that have a better rating from the NTU and what votes constituted said rating.
If you believe a B rating from the NTU, in defense of our national security and the safety of our troops makes a candidate unfit for command, than I fear for our country more than I did when I first read your post.
As far as the free trade issue goes...read the thread and click on the link here, that was also posted here!
There is NOTHING that is FREE to America in free trade.
And now a word about these so-called rating organizations.
When the National Right to Life prostitutes themselves by endorsing a candidate that THEY rated at 65.3% over a candidate that THEY rated at 100% using this hogwash as a justification, they render all the so-called watch dog and rating orgs impotent.
--- "In making its endorsement, National Right to Life considered the position of candidates on the life issues, their records on the life issues and their ability to win." ---
ABILITY TO WIN?!?!?!?! ARE YOU KIDDING ME???
No matter that 1,000,000 more babies may be slaughtered, as opposed to 2,000,000 if a rat gets in, the National RIGHT TO LIFE is more concerned with the "elusive" ABILITY TO WIN!
So as not to be too taxing, below you will find the copy and paste from their own site.
105th Congress:
Fred Thompson (R-TN) X X X X X X X X X X X X X O O 13 2 86%
John McCain (R-AZ) X X X X X X X O X X X X X O O 12 3 80%
Duncan Hunter (R-CA-52) X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 20 0 100%
106th:
John McCain (R-AZ) X X NV O O NV NV X X 4 2 66%
Fred Thompson (R-TN) X X X O O X X X X 7 2 77%
Duncan Hunter (R-CA-52) X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 20 0 100%
107th
John McCain (R-AZ) O O X 1 2 33%
Fred Thompson (R-TN) O O X 1 2 33%
Duncan Hunter (R-CA-52) X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 16 0 100%
McCain’s average = 59.7%
Fred’s average = 65.3%
Hunter’s average = 100%
Now let's move on to immigration and the destruction of NumbersUSA and Roy Beck.
In an e-mail update on Jan.3rd, these were their ratings.
EXCELLENT
34 points:
DUNCAN HUNTER
GOOD
28 points:
FRED THOMPSON -- His profile notwithstanding, nor his report card
22 points:
MITT ROMNEY
Fair
20 points: RON PAUL
18 points: MIKE HUCKABEE
Poor
8 points: RUDY GIULIANI
Bad
7 points:
CHRIS DODD
JOHN McCAIN
Compare to the absolute drivel that is being expounded in the e-mail today, Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:36:15 -0500:
--- "What a contrast to McCain (and the equally pro-amnesty Giuliani) is Sen. Thompson."
Look at our NumbersUSA home page for our description of how Thompson has the best immigration promises and plan of all the candidates polling above 5%.
Both Thompson and Romney have promised to make illegal aliens go home.
(Not that either one did a damn thing to make that happen when they actually held an office, regardless of the short time they both did so.)
But McCain's pro-amnesty plans received their greatest exposure this week when Gov. Huckabee signed NumbersUSA's "no-amnesty pledge" in front of a busload of national news media at North Greenville University in South Carolina. ---
Ooooooooh haaaaaaa, these guys are tough! Pfffffttt!
After reading this crap, I'd sooner vote for MeInsane, at least he doesn't lie about what he'll do...except for that amnesty isn't amnesty thingy.
Show me one with better ratings, across the board, than these of DUNCAN HUNTER!
National Rifle Association: A+
Americans for Better Immigration: A+
Eagle Forum: 100%
Christian Coalition: 100%
Family Research Council Action: 100%
Campaign for Working Families: 100%
Concerned Women for America: 100%
National Right to Life Committee: 100%
Federation for American Immigration Reform: 100%
National Federation of Independent Business: 100%
Gun Owners of America: A
** GodVoters.org: A ** (the ONLY A they gave)
American Conservative Union: 92%
Americans for Tax Reform: 88.5% (lifetime, most recent rating was 100%)
National Tax Limitation Committee: 88
National Taxpayers Union: B
ACLU: 7% (indicates very conservative)
NARAL: 0% (indicates a pro-life record)
I said he isn't exceptional as a fiscal conservative. I said nothing about other areas; we all know he's good on immigration and abortion and stuff. But he's still not going to excite fiscal conservatives.
Here are the numbers from the NTU (whose ratings are far more comprehensive in this area than, say, the ACU's):
2005:
McCain: 78% (A)
Thompson: N/A
Hunter: 56% (C+)
2004:
McCain: 77% (B+)
Thompson: N/A
Hunter: 56% (C+)
2003:
McCain: 72% (B-)
Thompson: N/A
Hunter: 58% (C)
2002:
McCain: 64% (B)
Thompson: 73% (A)
Hunter: 52% (C)
Note that Senate Republicans tend on average to be about 5% higher, so you can adjust Hunter's numbers for that if you want (the grades are already adjusted for that). He's still clearly not a particularly strong fiscal conservative.
Thank you for this link.