Posted on 10/30/2006 12:18:46 AM PST by Fred
Edited on 10/30/2006 1:32:06 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
He's from California! The man should be president.
Duncan Hunter is the great Chairman of the Armed services committee. Unfortunately he's from California and stands no chance of any senate or governor positions due to how liberal and out of their minds they are in California. Get to know him because he should be the nominee.
Hunter could be a serious candidate. He knows defense as well as anyone of either party and he is on the right side of the immigration issue.
Calm down. I think her referring to Bush being called "Shrub" was in response to your put down of Duncan Hunter and showing what a candidate goes through in how they supposedly can't be president. Hunter is more than qualified.
"My biggest fear is by the time it reaches here, there will be only four republicans to choose from: Giuliani, McCain, Rice and Hagel. "
What a nightmere.
Romney's was the best out of the names we've heard for the GOP but Hunter will be the best once he announces.
But there is a void on the Right for Prez08 and as I've been saying some unheralded candidates will step in to fill that vacuum.
Hunter is at least worthy of serious consideration. Who cares that he's a Rep?
Who is Hunter Duncan and what the hell does Macaca mean?
Duncan Hunter for President! I'm ready to give my donations!
If by "they" you mean liberal surrender monkeys you could be right.
If that is the case, than I can assure you there will be a patriotic conservative third party candidate the likes of Hunter or Tancredo. This will make Hitlery a shoe in. The Republican party is in dire straits and WE need to fix it in the primaries. We cannot wait for the general election and hope that the most electable Republican is representing the party.
Which is why, incidentally, Martin O'Malley for years has aimed to be Governor of Maryland. He has presidential aspirations.
I've consistently noticed, in every poll where the question's been asked, upwards of 70% of voters, and usually above 80% of voters, support tough border enforcement. IMO, the candidate that comes out strong on the border has the best chance to win in '08, regardless of party. It's the one issue most rank and file members of both parties agree on, and could rally around, especially if the Dem candidate is generally unpalatable (Hillary.)
If Duncan Hunter is steadfast and articulate on that one issue alone, he could win, and win handily, because you know the Dem challenger, whoever it is, will be all over the board on that issue.
If the Pubbies run on border security, '08's in the bag for them.
That 70 to 80% will collapse as soon as the MSM begins its campaigns against border control.
They haven't started yet because they would be agreeing with the President.
But any Republican that runs on illegal immigration will be destroyed.
It doesn't mean a Republican shouldn't try, but the MSM and Hollywood always, always, always, win in the end.
"...the MSM and Hollywood always, always, always, win in the end."
LOL! Like they won in 2000, 2002 and 2004? The MSM and Hollywood are going down the tubes financially precisely because they hold the minority view in America today. Due to the rise of the alternate media, they can no longer drive the debate unimpeded, and they become more irrelevent every day.
The MSM has been working the poor, little illegal immigrant meme for years now, and still upwards of 70% of both Repubs and Dems want firm action on the border.
Exactly right.
We have a two term President right now who once got ticketed for DWI, which was revealed on election eve by his enemies. He was an admitted "I drank too much" kind of drinker before swearing off alcohol and becoming very religious. The DWI happened such a long time ago. Yes it hurt him with the people who stay at home at the drop of a drive-by media hat. But he survived.
Hunter is awfully chummy with defense and other federal contractors in San Diego. Not "was," "is."
IMO, the MSM is doing a pretty good job of destroying itself. Too many of the major news outlets are refusing to change with the times; they are not called the dinosaur media for nothing. Most journalists are elitists, convinced of their superiority over the common folk and unable or unwilling to see their own bias. They used to get away with reporting propaganda, but that happens less and less these days, as Dan Rather will attest.
In 2004 the MSM said they would give Kerry 15 points at the ballot box. He still lost.
Patience, rose of sharon. The internet and the blogosphere, talk radio and moderate TV news are in the ascendency.
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.