Duncan Hunter to Run for President
Written by Sam on October 30th, 2006Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter (news, bio, voting record), the House Armed Services Committee chairman who coauthored legislation to build a fence along the U.S.-Mexico border, announced plans on Monday for a longshot presidential bid in 2008.
Hunter, who said support for a strong military and the fight against illegal immigration would be two of his top issues, is the first established Republican to say he would form an exploration com
This came out of nowhere today. I definitely like his two top issues, that’s for sure. I would like to know where he stands on taxes and private accounts for S.S.
One thing for sure, he is definitely the best candidate to come forward so far, in my opinion.
30
PM
Here’s what the Club for Growth (as y’all know, my favorite conservative advocacy group) has to say about Hunter in regards to his run for the Presidency:
Doesn’t look too good. The last thing we need is someone who’s protectionist on economic policies and terrible on earmarks. With all of Bush’s flaws, at least he has been in favor of CAFTA and other free-trade policies.
30
PM
I would support Allen ahead of Hunter, his spending and big government record cancel out his outstanding defense and immigration credentials.
30
PM
Yeah Allen, despite his best efforts to shove his foot down his throat, is still my #1 choice. So far he’s the only candidate in those likely running to have been endorsed by the Club. He led the fight in the Senate to halt the anti-527 legislation earlier this year and has an 83 score on the Club scorecard… not too shabby.
30
PM
I believe Allen will be the RNC tool nominee. Not to knock you guys supporting him, I’m just making a prediction.
31
AM
When I say that he is the best candidate to come forward so far, I am comparing against the other “definites”: Giuliani, Romney, and McCain.
I don’t think Allen will run.
31
AM
Allen will have to beat Webb first, and that’s looking like more and more of a long shot.
I agree with you Sam, he’s the best person to step forward. Here’s hoping that conservatives come out of the woodwork now to stand up against the candidates that the establishment is trying to shove down our throats.
31
AM
Allen is starting to pull away in VA. Partly because of pedophilia stories in his books. Webb has yet to accurately respond.
31
PM
What I know about this guy so far, I like.
31
PM
Looks like a crappy voting record to me.
1
PM
The main killer for me with Hunter is his record on spending and his protectionist views. If he were president in ‘08 would the 27.5% tariff on Chinese goods be enacted? That is an economy killer right there.
1
PM
Mike,
Don’t fall for that propaganda. We’d just switch from importing from the ChiComs to importing from India, SK, Japan, or the rest of the democratic world. The economic cost would be minimal, but the geopolitical gain would be huge.
The fact is, Communist China is the biggest threat facing the U.S. right now. Bigger than Islamo-terrorism? Wrong question - Communist China is the largest supporter of terrorism on the planet. They have helped armed the Iranian mullahs, Saddam Hussein, the Taliban (through Pakistan), and they even helped OBL launder his drug money.
The War on Terror is merely part of the Second Cold War between the U.S. and Communist China. Hunter is the best choice to ensure we win that war: http://china-e-lobby.blogspot.com/2006/10/duncan-hunter-for-president-updated.html.
1
PM
DJ it is not propaganda. I worked for almost two years in China for an American consulting company and I can tell you first hand that putting a tariff of 27.5% on Chinese goods coming to America would cripple the world economy. Why should I have to pay an extra tax to the Feds for cheap goods from China?
As for China being a national security threat I heartily agree, but economic disengagement from them hurts us in the long run and our economy must be in tip top condition so that we can finance and improve the best military in the world.
1
PM
It’s rarely a good idea to start a trade war with the country that owns all of your debt, they can %$@! you up.
2
AM
Yeah well we are getting the best end of the trade deal anyway, the profits. Who wants to be forced to own $1 trillion greenbacks?
2
AM
I don’t know if this race is really going to turn on each candidate’s perceived anti-communist credentials, either.
2
AM
As Andy Roth quoted on the Club For Growth blog the other day, “If goods don’t cross borders, armies will.”
I’m no expert like Mike, but putting harsh protectionist policies in place that will screw up trade relations with our greatest geopolitical threat just isn’t smart. Trade between countries and cultures fosters more than just an exchange of dollars; it also facilitates a transfer of ideas, of cultural beliefs, etc. Just look at how China opening up has turned it into a formidable force in the global economy and also Westernized the market there to an extent. Protectionist policies don’t benefit anyone but Uncle Sam, DJ: they hurt our economy, they hurt the world economy, they hurt our international relations, they hinder our economic growth and progress and exchange of ideas, and last but certainly not least they hurt the American consumer.
Now tell me why such policies seem like a good idea. I just can’t see it.
2
AM
Putting tariffs on Chinese goods would hurt the U.S. economy and if you don’t understand that, please take economics 101. America must compete in the global economy. We cannot run from it. Pat Buchanan is wrong on this issue.
2
AM
Pat Buchanan’s isolationist views would be detrimental to the U.S. economy beyond belief. He is way off the reservation when it comes to economic policy.
2
AM
I agree that we shouldn’t slap tariffs on Chinese goods, the losers would be the consumers in America, but the biggest problem with the “trade means no war” argument is that it fails to explain civil wars.
2
AM
I’m didn’t say nor imply “trade means no war.” What I did imply was that stifling trade and instituting protectionist policies are certainly possible causes of war. This is because war is always waged for one (or a combination) of three reasons: religion, economics, or power (it’s a vague term, but it applies to ethnic and other civil wars in conjunction with either religious or economic reasons).
2
PM
If you must know, JTM, I happen to have a Masters in Economics, so please spare us the condescending nonsense.
Langley, while you might like to believe Communist China has “opened up,” I must say you are deeply incorrect. Religious and political persecution has gotten worse, not better, and the “Westernized market” is largely a ruse - only Party Members and their sycophants have gotten rich.
Moreover, as the Communists’ support for terrorism makes clear, we have trade AND war right now. Would you have supported free trade with the Soviet Union? I didn’t think so.
Look, I agree with free-trade, so long as it’s not with nations arming our enemies and threatening our friends. If the discussion were about India, or Japan, I’d be with you.
But Communist China is different, pure and simple.
2
PM
DJ, China has opened up, it is no ruse. Religious and political persecution are not common in China. It is a dictatorship, but unless you want to make a political stand on an issue publicly you are left alone. Many hundreds of millions of people have seen their standard of living rise quite a bit, including people who are not party members. I have no seen any evidence to support your statements in my observations of China.
As for Chinese support of terror, it is limited. Their support for the numerous enemies of America is a calculated strategy to strengthen their own country. They are not our friends so what else would we expect from them?
Not trading with the Soviet Union wouldn’t shift the balance of power against us during the Cold War. Not trading with China now would cripple our economy at a time when we must be fully engaged worldwide. It is about maintaining our economic might so we can finance our military.
2
PM
Mike, you might want to tell people in Xinjiang that persecution isn’t common in China anymore.
3
AM
Persecution defined how? If you mean moving Han Chinese out to Xinjiang to “breed out” Uighurs is persecution then yeah, but it’s is not like the Chinese are being any more brutal than the Romans were to captured enemies, probably less so.
3
AM
Being less brutal than the Romans isn’t saying a great deal. Uighers are systematically beaten and imprisoned, discriminated against in education and employment in Xinjiang province in ways reminiscent of apartheid South Africa. Religious policies that blatantly favor Hui muslims over Central Asians have lead many Kazakh, Uigher, and Tajik Chinese to radical islamicism, which leads to harsher religious policies, which leads to….
On a basically unrelated note, one of my best friends is a Uigher medical student at 北大. One day I got him to take me on a tour of the medical campus, just within the 四环. In any case, he pointed a building out to me, “That’s where we do our autopsy training. When the government shoots criminals and no one comes to collect the body they sell it to the medical college.” I was fairly horrified, and also wondered how a body with bullet holes could be a good learning cadaver, so I asked him where they were shot. I mean, if they all had holes in their chests, how are you going to learn about the human heart? He misunderstood my meaning though, “I don’t know, they don’t shoot them on campus.”
I’m not going to argue that China hasn’t liberalized. The vast majority of the movement in this direction has been in economics, especially the allowing of foreign businesses to operate in China. The economic liberalization is far from perfect, the PLA controls a troubling share of the part of the economy that actually matters, but in some ways China is economically freer than the United States. Political liberalization lags behind, but people in America who think China still has Red Guards running around need their tin-foil adjusted a few degrees. Even in the touchy area of religion there are a lot of hopeful signs. That being said, it is still a country where AIDS activists are randomly beaten by Public Security, the one-child policy is enforced in ghoulish ways, and churches are demolished.
Of course, it’s impossible to really blame Chinese illiberalism on communism. If the ultimate anti-communist solution, the re-establishment of the Qing dynasty or something like that, then I imagine things would be quite a bit worse. And ultimately this is all mostly China’s business. I of course oppose China’s persecution of the Church, but the Body of Christ has been oppressed before, and we all know Who wins out on that one in the end. As far as other matters are concerned: freedoms of the press, speech, etc. Sure, they’re nice here, but there isn’t a great deal of sense in trying to impute our values directly onto another culture and despise them for not adopting them.