Politics Update

Wow, what a month. I have seen the disappointment of losing an excellent candidate. I am contemplating running for office myself (not POTUS!). I have decided to leave the Republican Party. What else? I've decided to endorse yet another long shot candidate. So let's get started:

BIG REASON TO LEAVE
Regarding running for an office, right now, all I will mention is that I am at a loss for a party. I have decided to leave the Republican Party after learning of the link between George Soros (MoveOn.org financier, as well as a number of other less visible but more harmful causes) and McCain. I have waited for the denouncement of McCain by the GOP as it is a most shameful thing to be allied and financed by a person intent on destroying America as we know it. So I have decided that I can not abide a party that tolerates corrupted (or Trojan) individuals at this kind of level.

TRYING TO FIND A HOME
I have looked at a lot of parties, and many of them basically seem to have given up the ghost and jumped on the Ron Paul bandwagon (RPB). That pretty much brings me to question their views on foreign policy. This is true, even of the two parties that I like the best of the minor parties: Constitution Party and the America First Party. Ultimately, I see the RPB views as idealistic and not thought out. I can understand (and appreciate) ideological purity, but they are the right-wing or liberterian equivalent of the elite liberals (a.k.a the ivory tower) that has no basis in reality. Well, here is my quick and dirty summary of two failings of the RPB in matters of foreign policy:

1) I think support for Israel is critical. (I've read Chuck Baldwin's defense of Ron Paul on this issue and found it wanting -- I may write a blog post sometime about why). The RPB effectively say**: we must stop supporting Israel, and once we leave Iraq there will be no reason to attack us and then we will be safe. In Numbers, God repeats His promise of blessing those who bless the people of Israel, and cursing those who curse Israel. Given that we have over 40 million abortion in this land, I see this is as primary reason good has not judged us as we deserved. To abandon Israel would be destructive for our nation.

2) While I am sympathetic to the fact that we didn't properly declare war, the view of "just get out" is very naive. We need to win, or the latter state will be worse than the first. If we leave quickly, we encourage a number of things: a) Instability in the region. Syria, Iran, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Bin Laden will try to get control of the region. The instability itself will make more enemies (and put us under yet another blood guilt, just as the first Bush did with the first Iraq War) because we abandoned people to chaos and power struggles. b) Terrorists would be confirmed in their view that the US is a big sissy and will give up if resisted enough. c) Terrorists hate us because of our support for Israel, and have thus chosen (from a spiritual view) the wrong side. d) Radical Muslims will hate the US for additional reasons, consider that the state of Iran years back announced its concern of the young people being taught witchcraft by Harry Potter films. They will see us a corrupting influence and hate us for that or any other number of reasons they seek to concoct. If you are going to start the appeasement route, you better get busy because there will be a lot of appeasing to do.

**RPB folks will adjust their message based on their audience. For pro-Islam groups, they will talk about how the US will not be supporting Israel under a RP administration. For pro-Israel groups, they say: Israel will be stronger, and their neighboring countries won't get so much money.

I am grieved for my children

I couldn't get back to sleep after playing a support role in a diaper change. Yesterday, the best man (Duncan Hunter) in the race dropped out. So, to my sorrow, I look at the Republican playing field with dismay.

If you are in a state that hasn't voted yet and are dissatisfied with the choices, I'm with you! Keyes and Thompson are the next best thing to Hunter, and next best in this case is mediocre :-( In any case, if either candidate is palpable to you, I encourage you to vote for them. If they are not, I encourage you to write Duncan Hunter's name in.

I may do that in the General Election. Although, I will support ANY candidate with Duncan Hunter as the VP running mate, even Hillary. Well, I guess the remaining Republicans Candidates are not quite as bad as her, but they aren't anything to brag about either. Given the tier 1 candidates but Thompson are liars about themselves and the other candidates (check out www.factcheck.org), all tier 1 candidates have hidden liberal agendas (I've listed that in other posts).

And our nation is under a curse. We have but to take our support for Israel away, and I believe that the protecting hand on our nation will be taken away. For God said (Numbers 24:9) that those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will be cursed. Even if we are indifferent to Israel we are no better off than cursing Israel for our nation deserves punishment. Consider, that well over 40 million children have been aborted in 35 years since Roe v Wade (if you don't think this is a big deal consider 2Ki21:16 and 2Ki24:2-4). Consider that we have turned many things that God has said an abomination or hated by God into good and honorable thing!!: lying, perjury, unfair measures, homosexuality, and divorce.

And consider, that the curses of God have indeed begun. Consider Deut 28:43-44 "The alien who is among you shall rise above you higher and higher, but you will go down lower and lower. He shall lend to you, but you will not lend to him; (AV)he shall be the head, and you will be the tail. " Now consider the issue of illegal immigrants (II) in the US. Consider that the II population is growing a larger rate than the general populace, that crime is increasing, that the wealth they earn here is sent home (for the large part), and consider that for inexplicable reasons our Government doesn't care about intrustions into our border by the Mexican military. Consider also news articles about the foreign purchasing of America. We are being taken over as a nation. We are moving to a socialist state as a nation (many of the Deut 28 curses could easily be fulfilled by a socialist philosophy). We are borrowing and not lending (except to nations in even far worse state than us!) Right now I am not hopeful.

Why, then, did I have hope of Duncan Hunter resolving the problems? Partially, because I could see him as a leader like King Josiah of old. Because he would execute the office with integrity. Because he is articulate, and thus may persuade a nation that is sitting on the fence to choose righteousness and not wickedness. Because he also sees the impending dangers and will have an urgency about doing what needs to be done. Because he has been faithful with little, and would likely be faithful with much.

And now, I am grieved for my children.

P.S. Any Ron Paul endorsement comments will not be accepted. I am aware of the online dynamics of that campaign, and won't allow it here.

Enter: Nate the Great

Nathaniel Scott McKay was born at 9:33 am on 1/11/08. He weighed in at 9 lbs 13 oz, and 20.5 in long. The circumference of his head was 38 cm.

Mother and son are doing fine. Thank you all for your prayers!

Yes, Indeed! Another Endorsement for Duncan Hunter

Media Advisory
HUNTER WINS NEVADA REPUBLICAN ASSEMBLY ENDORSEMENT


For Immediate Release:

Reno , NV
Contact: Gary Becks (619)334-1655

The Nevada Republican Assembly held a Presidential Endorsing Convention on Sunday Jan 6, 2008, choosing Congressman Duncan Hunter with their endorsement. The endorsement by NVRA by over 2/3 majority is a significant statement about the character and principles of a living and practicing conservative Republican. Duncan Hunter 's record as a 26 year member of Congress places him squarely at the lead of all the GOP contenders, as the standard bearer of conservative Republican example.

On Saturday Jan 5, at 1:00 PM Candidate Duncan Hunter addressed an enthusiastic crowd of convention attendees, by phone conference.

The President of the NVRA, Michael Kressler and the members of the NVRA are proud to endorse Duncan Hunter for President for his stand on the values of the sanctity of life, support of our constitution, 2 nd Amendment rights, security of our borders, limited government, love of God, parental rights, Fair Trade, Fair Tax, educational excellence, state sovereignty, controlled spending and protection of private property.

Congressman Hunter was elated to receive word from NV campaign personnel just moments following the prestigious and important NVRA Nevada Republican Assembly endorsement. For more information or to arrange for interview, please contact Gary Becks (619)334-1655 or dlhunter08@yahoo.com

To speak with a state representative contact Kristie Parker at (775)313-7206 or kristie.parker@gohunter2008.org or Tim Shepard at (775)997-5918 or tim.shepard@gohunter2008.org

###

Hunter for President, Inc.
9340 Fuerte Drive
La Mesa, California 91941
United States

Out of the Mouths of Babes

Well, obviously the political season has wound down a bit in Iowa. And that is ok. I've been writing less blog entries, and been working for the last week before baby #3 comes with gathering info for the Hunter campaign. But the work was tedious, so I decided to write a program (am still working out the kinks) to automate the gathering of contact information for a group of people.

Well, as a good Duncan Hunter supporter, I've told my kids that Duncan Hunter is the best man for our country, but not really able to explain it deeply to a 3 and 5 year old. Patrick (our 5 year old) says: Duncan Hunter is the best one for our state. And that has been humorous. States and USA are the same in his mind, I think.

But I heard about something funny with Caleb (our 3 year old). Today at the local Target store, he stepped up on a stool that was in an aisle, and said: "I'm Barack Obama, and I approved this message." Think there have been too many political ads on TV! Patrick can ask: What about Hillary Clinton? What about Barack Obama? And he's curious -- in the sense that he sees it like a sport or a race with winners and losers.

My planned speech for Hunter at the Precinct Caucus

Special thanks to SK Johnson who wrote a chunk of it, and inspired a large chunk of what's left.

Why are we here? Or to be more precise, why are we caucusing as Republicans? The cynical might say because we want power. And perhaps there is some truth to that, as there is a power vacuum that encourages the Presidential race to be more contentious. However, I believe what sets our party apart from the Democrats is that we have believed in principles that have worked through the ages. In general, we believe our rights are given by God and not by man (just as the Declaration of Independence states). We believe that we have responsibilities and duties that come with those rights. We believe that our government should protect us, our rights, and not impose a heavy burden on the people. We believe in Reagan's principle of "Trust but verify." We believe that if you reward bad behavior, you get more of it.

Indeed these principles are important -- and our party and our nation has suffered when we have abandoned them. When we have adhered to these principles, our nation prospered. And now there is a new discussion, are the principles of conservatism really relevant in a modern age. Of course our neighbors as the other caucus would say no -- but I believe them to be in error. Understanding the principles of conservatism helps us to understand the way people and governments interact. It allows us to not be naive as Chamberlain was with Hitler, saying "We have peace in our time" by a policy of appeasement. It allows us to look at policies and see whether they encourage laziness or apathy, or are actually beneficial. These principles, while rooted in ages past give us vision into the future, and so are very important.

In 1980, a revolutionary conservative was elected president and along with him a slew of conservative congressmen. One of them was Duncan Hunter, from San Diego California. For the 8 years of the Reagan presidency, Duncan Hunter led the charge to support his policies. If Ronal Reagan wanted it done, more than likely Duncan Hunter would be pushing for it. Small government, strong national defense, and the protection of the family.

However, that didn't mean they always agreed. In 1986, Duncan Hunter stood in opposition of the amnesty for illegal immigrants which both Republicans and Democrats supported, for he saw clearly through the eyes of the principle that if you reward bad or illegal behavior, you will get more of it.

This continuous practice of conservative principles manifested in many ways. Duncan Hunter supported securing the borders long before it was in vogue, and the success of the border fence he got built to the south of San Diego cut human and drug trafficking by 90% and overall crime by 50%. He has worked tirelessly to make sure that the US has such a fence throughout the rest of its border.

Duncan Hunter is pro-life, and not a recent convert to the cause. He has supported a constitutional ban for his entire 26 year career in the congress.

Duncan Hunter supports leveling the playing field on trade so that we can bring back manufacturing jobs. He is in favor of fighting against unfair trade deals, and willing to not turn a blind eye to transgressions of governments like China to undercut the sale of our goods.

Duncan Hunter is a co-sponsor for the original bill to try and implement the fair tax.

There is a chance that you haven't heard of Duncan Hunter before today. There are different reasons for that. The main one is that Duncan Hunter is a congressman from a small part of the country,
which makes it hard to get his name out. But one important reason is that Duncan Hunter maintains his responsibilities as a congressman and has had to leave the campaign trail to fight for important issues. During the campaign, and even in the days leading up to the Iowa straw polls, He wrote a bill to stop the NAFTA highway from being built. He wrote a bill for a congressional pardon of Ramos and Compean, the two border guards imprisoned for injuring a drug smuggler trying to cross the border.

Some have said that Duncan Hunter is a single issue voter, but that is only true if you look at it this way: Duncan Hunter's single issue is the success and prosperity of the United States of America. This is why you don't have to worry about a candidate who is seeking to satisfy a personal ambition. Not only that, but he believes in and has supported many of the issues that have bound Republicans together over the last 26 years. He knows the details, the underlying causes, he has not wasted his time as a representative of the people.

In this way, he is uniquely qualified as the Republican Nominee for President. He will be able to draw in Reagan Democrats with his fair trade policies, he will be able to draw in independents with his ability to articulate issues and speak from conviction (and not based on marketing data!). You can count on him to be clear of scandal because of his integrity and refusal to lie about himself as well as others. He has the fire in the belly to fight the tough battles, and he has done so many times over the last 26 years, and you can count on him as President to not let a divided congress stall his Supreme Court Justice nominations. You can count on him as President to not let a divided congress to harm our position overseas, or to stall the border fence.

The race is just beginning, and Duncan Hunter is far from planning on dropping out. I hope you will give him your vote, and will join him in his dream which he stated in an interview a few months ago: He said, "I would like to see a country where the day I walk out of the White House, after a couple of terms, the American people are more independent of government than the day that I walked in." And if that dream is anything like yours, I believe he deserves your vote.

Wisdom in Decision 2008: Advancing America instead of Encouraging Retreat or the Status Quo

The lay of the political presidential landscape is looking pretty strange these days. One prominent Republican candidate is essentially advocating that too much drive is a bad thing, so vote for him! Others have incredible drive, but would use it to take the country down questionable paths of populism or personal ambition. Some of the candidates possess excellent leadership skills, but would lead us down dark paths of dependency upon government or paths of social experimentation.

You might say: I know who is for the Status Quo, for they have no fire in the belly; but why is that a bad thing? That is a good question. Consider that the Status Quo is really only desirable when all the following conditions are met : 1) Your nation is in a position of strength, 2) Your governments are not burdensome to the people, 3) Your people are mostly moral well-informed good citizens, and 4) Your enemies are weak. Note that the first condition is met, albeit less with each passing year as we ship our financial and industrial strength to other nations (and even more recently our military secrets: http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/01/business/transfer.php). Note that the second condition is not met, consider of the IRS, property taxes, DHS, etc... . Condition three is certainly not met (consider that the US has at least 40 million abortions to reckon with; also, the education and critical reasoning of the general populace is declining as the NEA increases in power). Condition four is questionable, especially as our weaker enemies (such as China) have become stronger through our naivete. Consider then, that there is need for our nation to move forward, and next ask yourself if a person who does not have a strong drive will accomplish much in a divided Congress. What happens if Congress stymies the improvements of this president? What will he do? Will he say that he tried and give up? Or will he pursue it, perhaps taking it to the American people? A person without sufficient fire in the belly will not be able to advance his case in a divided congress. He won't be able to do it with Supreme Court justices, and he won't be able to do it with Immigration, or National Security, Tax Cuts, or Tax Reform.

You might say: Very well, I know who is for the Status Quo, for they have no fire in the belly; but how am I to know the one who will make America better and not worse? That is a good question as well. First, you should know that the principles of conservatism have been successful in moving this country forward when no amount of government spending for liberal and populist ideas has succeeded. Consider that because our rights are God-given, it is not possible for Government (the liberal's new god) to take them away. The foundation of a belief in God is critical to having a just, moral and FREE society (or if you prefer FREE REPUBLIC). Consider that because Ronald Reagan was prudent with the Soviet Union when the previous presidents were naive, that we did not succumb to their attempts to use negotiation to undermine our national defense ("Star Wars") efforts. Even Gorbachev agreed that such a stance was useful for the Soviet Union to understand the United States priorities and encouraged the peace process. (I guess it was good that Reagan was a so-called warmonger.) Consider that as the NEA gets more funding that education is demonstrably declining (in Iowa, we've gone from being 2nd in the nation to 9th as the NEA has increased in power and education funding has increased).

Principle Zero may be thus derived: A candidate who cares deeply about conservative issues is to be preferred to one who does not.
Principle One may be thus derived: A candidate who has shown leadership in advancing conservative issues is to be preferred to one who has not.

You might say: That is well and good, but how then am I to know the true conservatives from the phonies? That is a difficult question to answer perfectly, however some principles can effectively guide you to a solution.

Many of the candidates want you to believe their rhetoric, even though their public (or private) lives have not shown that they actually have lived their rhetoric. But we must not hold grudges, they say, and encourage us to forget the Biblical principle that those who are faithful with little will be faithful with much, which to the astute tells us to be wary of those who claim a mantle that they have not worn for many years. This is not a new phenomenon, for example, there have been many pro-Life democrats, who upon consideration of a presidential run "see the light" and become pro-Choice. Or vice-versa. Note that any "convert" in the political realm who cannot fully explain their "conversion" as well as provide a well-reasoned support fo the issue (which can be anything of import from life to immigration) should be treated with skepticism.

Principle Two may be thus derived: A true conservative candidate will have a history that supports his platform. (Or... see Principle Three)
Principle Three may be thus derived: A recent "convert" on an issue should be able to a) articulate his reason for the change, and b) effectively articulate the rational basis for supporting the issue.

Another indicator of a potential phony is how honorable and honest the candidate is. Why is being honest and honorable important? First, it indicates whether they have a healthy fear of the Lord. If they see themselves as accountable to God, they are a) more likely to be a solid conservative, and b) more likely to respect God-given rights. Second, it indicates whether they believe that their actions reflect on the people they represent and support. Third, a person who has shown a pattern of honesty in his life is less likely to lie now and be a phony. Here are some questions to gauge the candidates: Does the candidate feel free to twist the truth to attack other candidates? Does the candidate feel free to twist the truth to bolster his own record? Does the candidate attack the questioner or seek to undermine the questioner's integrity? Does the candidate no longer back an issue because it has become unpopular? Websites like http://www.factcheck.org are useful for answering these questions.

Principle Four may be thus derived: A true conservative candidate will be honorable and honest.

Now, armed with these principles, let us apply them to the candidates. Be wary of those without integrity first of all. An excellent leader who says he is a conservative but has no integrity cannot be trusted to advance conservative issues. Now, does their conservative rhetoric match their lives? This candidate is a true conservative. He is honorable and worthy of consideration. Next ask: does he have the drive to advance conservative issues? If you answered yes, then that is indeed the candidate who will advance America.

With these principles, I find that I am left with a strong candidate for President of the United States. Duncan Hunter (http://www.gohunter08.com/inner.asp?z=1) is a man of integrity, resisting pressure and standing on the principles of what is good for America (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/leadership-knows-rep.-duncan-hunters-arm-doesnt-twist-2006-04-05.html), with a record that matches his rhetoric, as well as the leadership to succeed at contested but critical issues (like the border fence: http://www.house.gov/hunter/border1.html).

Some predictions for the coming year

I predict the following in the political realm:

• Huckabee will tank shortly after his narrow loss in Iowa. He may make it to South Carolina. The religious right who supported him will be despondent.
  
• Thompson will drop out after South Carolina (or perhaps slightly before). The federalists who supported him will be despondent.
  
• McCain will drop out after South Carolina, unless he finds a big sugar daddy...
  
• Guiliani will get big donations from NY and CA and stay in the race.
  
• Romney will continue to get big donations from his brethren.
  
• The religious right will be looking for someone to take their flag, and be split 3 ways: Hunter, Keyes, and no-one.
  
• The federalists will be looking for a consistent conservative will look at Keyes and Hunter of them, and dismiss Keyes because he seems so shrill. Then the Federalists will look at Hunter or Romney, and many will look at Romney and say he will win, so will vote for him. The rest will support Hunter or not care.
  
• If McCain drops out, Guiliani and Romney will be neck and neck. Hunter will continue his slow and steady progress.
  
• There will be much bad blood between the Romney and Guiliani supporters (just like there was between Romney and Huckabee supporters), and at the conventions Hunter will emerge as the Republican Nominee.
  

Meanwhile, on the dark side of the planet:

• Barack defeats Hillary in Iowa. East coast liberals immediately call for Iowa to no longer be first caucus in the nation (just like they called for an end to the electoral system when Al Gore lost)
  
• Dodd or Biden makes a surprisingly strong 4th place finish, very close to what Edwards gets in 3rd place. Whichever this one is, his campaign is invigorated.
  
• Edwards campaign tanks after Iowa. He was supposed to do better than a narrow 3rd place victory.
  
• Kucinich gets upgraded by the aliens, and is given hypnotic powers. He makes a third party run with both Ron Paul and Ralph Nader as his running mates. [I'm allowed a little humor in my predictions, right?]
  
• New Hampshire turns real dirty, and Hillary's machine lets loose on Barach in a desperate ploy to not lose. Meanwhile, Bill Clinton talks about how Iowa mistreated his genius of a wife, and the only way Barack could have won was if the election was rigged.
  
• However, Barack unleashes Oprah, and she wrestles with Bill in Hand to Hand combat. Oprah wins, through details and sneakiness I dare not say, but is wounded in the melee.
  
• Barack lays hands upon her, and behold America has the opportunity to witness Revelation take place. Either with Oprah, or with Hillary. :-{P
  
• Hillary wins the New Hampshire election, and there is terribly bad blood between Hillary and Barack. Hillary arranges for Edwards support by promises she has no intention to keep, and is able to win South Carolina as well, however the voting irregularities will make Florida's Miami and Dade county problems looking like a dress rehearsal.
  
• Barack will lose momentum as the press will turn on him. But Oprah will fund more of his campaign, hoping to keep it from hemorraging.
  
• Hillary goes into the convention with a narrow lead on delegates, but by no more than 5%, and the animosity at the Democratic convention (I pity the city that hosts them) will be so bad that rioting will break out. Of course Bush will be blamed for that as well....
  
• Hillary will make lots of promises behind closed doors and will have much more than 5% margin.
  
• Barack will regretfully yield, but only after being promised the position of Secretary of State.
  
• Hillary will be the nominee, but with some surprising vice presidential candidate.
  

And the winner??? Why, Duncan Hunter of course.

Happy new year to all!

An Open Letter to Iowa GOP -- Choose Wisely, Choose Hunter

Open Letter to the Iowa GOP – Choose Wisely, Choose Hunter



Guest Editorial
Alexander J. Madison - December 31, 2007

Dear Iowegians,

Every presidential election season, your state has the opportunity to help shape the election going forward. Unfortunately, too many times, you have selected a dud during the Iowa Caucuses. In 1976, you picked Gerald Ford, proponent of the ERA and abortion rights, over a very conservative Ronald Reagan. In 1980, you chose a very moderate Bush over Reagan. And twice you picked a milquetoast named Bob Dole. Granted, the choices are sometimes between dud and duddier, but this year is different. This year you have a chance to select a rock-ribbed conservative Reaganite to make up for not choosing the original Reaganite when you had the chance. The name is Duncan Hunter.

Congressman Duncan Hunter is a representative from California's 52nd legislative district. Mr. Hunter put his college career on hold to volunteer with the 173rd Airborne Rangers to fight the communists in Vietnam. Like Reagan, Hunter believes that war was not only very winnable, but was indeed a "noble cause". And the killing fields that followed our departure from that conflict are a bold testament to their vision over the head-in-the-sand lack of vision (which continues to this day) from the defeatist democrats and RINOs.

Duncan Hunter also entered office with Reagan in 1981, at the ripe old age of 32. He immediately was able to join the Armed Services Committee in Congress, where he has remained to this day, as former Chairmen, and current Ranking Republican. It was in large part due to Mr. Hunter's efforts, teaming with folks like Jack Kemp and Henry Hyde, that Reagan was able to ramrod our historic military buildup through Congress in the 80s, which revitalized every branch of our Armed Services. Jack Kemp even credits Hunter with being the go-to guy for strong-arming the very controversial 'Star Wars' Strategic Defense Initiative through the House. The results of that persistence and vision is paying off in spades, despite the howls of leftists worldwide, as we today have working missile defense systems either in field, or soon to be fielded; including laser based systems for which Reagan was mercilessly ridiculed by the ignorant 'academics' and the press. Hunter was and is perhaps the staunchest anti-communist to sit in Congress. He was the leader most responsible, aside from Reagan, for stemming the commie-creep in Central America during the 1980s, and his disdain for communism has never ebbed.

Duncan Hunter is the ONLY candidate that realizes what China is up to, both militarily with its rapid armament increases, and economically, with its long term strategy to undermine the United States' industrial base. Hunter is dead set against the 'one-way', idiotic trade deal we have with the Chinese, will put a quick end to further technology transfers to the communist nation, and will build up our own military to the point that a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be nothing short of a quick suicide mission for communism. All the other candidates tip toe around the issue of China. Hunter plans to step on their throat.
When it comes to the 2nd Amendment, the 10th Amendment, lowering taxes, fighting the ACLU and political correctness, standing firm against the gay agenda, and sweeping out useless bureaucrats and bureaucracies from the federal government, Duncan Hunter is the only choice.

Unlike John McCain and Mitt Romney, Hunter won't find anything in the Constitution to justify supporting a ban on 'assault weapons' or 'cheap handguns'. Hunter has a perfect lifetime record with the NRA and the Gun Owners of America. Both Mitt and McCain are liberals in this arena.

Unlike Fred Thompson, Hunter won't have to lie about previous pro-choice sympathies. Unlike Fred, Hunter has a perfectly consistent record on the life of the unborn, and has sponsored legislation for many, many years to give full constitutional protection to the unborn – legislation that Fred does not support.

Unlike McCain and Thompson, Hunter certainly will not run roughshod over the 1st Amendment for the sake of 'campaign finance reform'. And Hunter will work to ditch the last vestiges of McCain-Feingold-Thompson, if the courts don't do it first.

Unlike Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson, Hunter did not and does not buy into the global warming nonsense in any way, shape or form. The only guarantee we have of avoiding a binding, sovereignty usurping, international treaty on global warming is to place a President in power who does not believe the GW alarmism and does not believe in sovereignty usurping international treaties.

Unlike Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, Hunter does not have some convoluted explanation for why the socialized medicine experiments in Massachusetts (RomneyCare) and Arkansas (ARKids) are a good thing that deserves replication nationally. Indeed, Hunter wants to get government out of the way and reduce the regulations on health insurance by killing off mandates and regulations.

Unlike Mike Huckabee, Hunter will not be contemplating how to mandate and enforce a nationwide ban on smoking in public places, nor will he be scheming to introduce more arts and music and healthy snacks into the nation's public schools. The NEA, who apparently like Mr. Huckabee, despise Congressman Hunter – a genuine supporter of school choice.

Unlike Rudy Giuliani, Hunter does not have to pretend he is a conservative. A man who sued 26 firearms manufacturers to essentially put them out of business has no business seeking the office of the Presidency on the GOP ticket, unless gun control, abortion rights, gay 'rights', and eminent domain abuse are now part of the GOP platform.

Unlike Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, Hunter does not have to lie through his teeth when it comes to his record on illegal immigration. While it is hilarious to see these guys try to 'Out –Tancredo Tancredo' on the issue, only one guy truly does out-Tancredo the Colorado Congressman. While Duncan Hunter has sponsored or cosponsored 85 bills and amendments to stop illegal immigration in this country dead in its tracks, not one of these others lifted a finger during their careers, and range from bad to worse on the issue. While 'The Road to Des Moines' and last springs citizen revolt led these supposed conservatives to finally see the light – at least in rhetoric, Hunter has been fighting the RINOS and dems on this for 27 years. Hunter wrote the border fence bill (recently defanged by the RINOS), and Hunter is the ONLY one who has vowed to actively deport those currently squatting here illegally.

And finally, Duncan Hunter is the most experienced in warfare, defense systems, foreign policy and the security of our nation. If we are intent on defeating the islamists ASAP- without worrying about offending anyone, keeping terrorists out of our country, and rising to meet the future threats posed by the China-Russia-Iran-Venezuela axis, then we better elect a Reaganite this time around.

If not, we may have to put up with an idiot who thinks we need to close Gitmo and end waterboarding because the world disapproves (Huckabee, McCain), or someone who thinks we just need to be more humble and accommodating on the world stage (Huckabee), or someone who can't figure out that enriching China is a fools errand (Fred, Mitt, McCain), or someone who has no clue about our military needs and capabilities and would not know an IED from an IUD (Rudy, Huckabee, Mitt).

The choice is clearer than it has been since 1980. Don't let history pass you by….again.


Most Sincerely,

Alexander J. Madison


As always, thanks for your support!

Hunter for President!


Hunter for President, Inc.
9340 Fuerte Drive
La Mesa, California 91941
United States

Excellent descriptions of the qualifications of Duncan Hunter

Why conservatives need to support Duncan Hunter

Duncan Hunter has vision