Duncan Hunter on the Issues

www.issues2002.org ^ | 12/14/06 | Antoninus

[brazzaville]

Good morning.

"Hunter/Steele" does sing, doesn't it. It's just about right for a bumper sticker. The fact that it actually might attract a bunch of voters who wouldn't ordinarily vote Republican helps, too.

Michael Frazier

[JamesP81]

I don't like what I'm seeing on how he views the WOD. I also don't support use of the death penalty (not until our justice system shows it can justly use it every single time without fail, which it certainly has not), but I don't expect to win that one any time soon. I suspect that he's probably not as gung ho about returning the federal government to its constitutional boundaries (per the 10th Amendment) but I think he'd be an improvement over what we're doing.

Other than that, he looks pretty good.

What we need, for a political platform, and in a president, is a melding between social conservatism and libertarian conservatism. That means that each side is going to have to give up something. I think social conservatives need to have a change of heart about the WOD. Putting someone who smokes MJ or even crack in a federal prison, who didn't harm anyone else while doing it, isn't going to change anything except make a criminal out of someone who didn't hurt anybody else. Also, the government is eroding more and more civil liberties because of the WOD. What many Christians can't seem to understand, and its mindboggling, is that police running around dressed up like Delta force soldiers and executing no-knock warrants is not a good thing. The result of that is that innocent people die. I'd like to know how many innocent people are imprisoned, injured, or killed on a yearly basis because of the WOD. Christians are also going to have give on anything smacking of government-funded charity, or anything excessively non-capitalist in nature as far as economic policy goes. Christians also need to get out of their heads this idea that man's laws were written to govern man's behavior. I don't care if the church has been teaching this (and it has, over the past few years), it ain't so. God's Laws are for the governing of man's behavior, because God's laws alone are the only ones capable of telling man how he should live. Man's laws exist solely to protect the individual's rights from infringement. Adjust your thinking accordingly.

Libertarians are going to have forget the pro-choice stuff. I don't care who you are: if you honestly think that a woman has the right to kill her own child, you are not serious about securing individual rights from infraction. And, frankly, it'd help a lot of they'd quit raising hell about Christian opposition to gay marriage. While they also got some good points on the WOD, they need to realize that there are other issues out there, and that total drug legalization isn't the only option. To tell you the truth, I think illegal drug use should, at the most, be nothing more than a violation; you get a ticket for it. OTOH, selling it should be dealt with more severely.

Add into this mix a candidate that takes the 10th Amendment seriously. He would also need to be someone who wouldn't put up with the unchecked abuse in the justice system we have today (the family court system and Duke lacrosse should be ringing bells here).

Add to all that a guy who is easy going, approachable, loves and believes in the idea of America, and has optimism about his nation. These are the things we need in a winning candidate.

In short, we need Ronald Reagan.

Until the GOP returns to Reagan's political heritage, it will never be any more effective than it has been in the past 6 years. In fact, if we don't return to Reagan's ideas, we may never control any part of the government ever again.

[Paul Ross]

This is the key. The race has already begun and sides have been chosen up. The conservatives are still in the gate. It's time we unite behind a conservative candidate and go for it, instead of wasting time arguing about why things won't work

BUMP!

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

[Sprite518]

Not a bad voting record. I would say I agree with most of what he voted for...

[TheBattman]

IF Rudy drops out???? Exactly what about Rudy makes you want to support him? It certainly isn't his conservative record...

[EnigmaticAnomaly]

Looks like I we have a surprisingly refreshing potential alternative to the rino rubbish laid before us for 2008...

[expatguy]

What is not to like about Hunter?

[JockoManning]

= = = marker = = =

[cookcounty]

"What about his personal life?"

The only negative I'm aware of is that he was involved (along with 100+ other members) in the House Bank and Post Office scandal (remember kiting of checks and "postage stamp trading" from the Dan Rostenkowski years----pre-Newt?). Hunter was one of the more minor offenders and apologized to his constituents.

[cookcounty]

"James Garfield was the only person ever elected President directly from the House of Representatives, back in 1881."

Stating the fact doesn't explain the fact. It isn't some Law of the Natural Order that a congressman can't get elected. There are reasons that appears to be so, but what are those reasons? If we define them, perhaps they can be overcome.

I would think that there are 2 reasons:

1. Usually, being a member of the House is not "notorious enough" to get much name recognition, which is the first pre-requisite to winning the White House.

2. Congressmen (and Senators) have the problem of having voted, at one time or another, for massive omnibus bills with pork packed away in their deep recesses. Before long it will be revealed that Hunter voted for research in left-handedness in Peruvian frogs or studies on the sexual lives of Korean dragonlies or somesuch. This needs to be overcome.

My suggestion is to hit them head on. Duncan looks a tad portly. He can use this as a good-humor asset. He could do a bicycle tour of every district in California to a) LOSE some weight and b) build support in his home state for the convention get some attention. Pick a slogan like "Lose with Duncan Hunter" because then the whole thing will get some attention.

Then he could hit the "what I voted for" head-on with humerous ads of Duncan, flanked by massive thousand-page tax bills. "You wouldn't believe what I've had to vote for....." would be a great theme of those early "getting to know you" ads. It's very important that those first ads be sunny and humerous, the kind that make people say to themselves "tell me more."

If he doesn't do this type of thing, and do it quickly, the MSM will do the defining, and that would be disastrous.

[Verax]

Voted YES on replacing illegal export tax breaks with $140B in new breaks.

$140 Billion in corporate "tax breaks"...

I'd like more information on that.

[Verax]

Then he could hit the "what I voted for" head-on with humerous ads of Duncan, flanked by massive thousand-page tax bills. "You wouldn't believe what I've had to vote for....." would be a great theme of those early "getting to know you" ads

Dude, stay away from any marketing-related careers...LOL

[Paperdoll]

>...I would gladly vote for Hunter over McPain, Mitt, or Rino Rudy<

I would include Ross...er Fred Thompson in the above.
It's due or die time, people; our last chance to restore the country, to retain our freedoms. All naysayers be darned, true Americans should vote their highest principles in the primaries, even if we have to write them in. As for me, it's GO DUNCAN HUNTER. WE LOVE YA!

[Maurice Tift]