« From the ‘with friends like this’ file…» Game over man, game over

Duncan Hunter interview

Pundit Review recently conducted an interview with Rep. Duncan Hunter. You can listen to the interview here.

(For those of you searching for a true conservative in the upcoming presidential race, Rep. Hunter fits the bill.)

Here’s a description of the interview:

Rep. Hunter was incredibly generous with his time, spending more than 30 minutes with us discussing a wide range of topics. Of course, we asked him about the anti-surge, non-binding resolution that was passed this weekend. He had some pointed criticism of his colleagues, and questioned how much they understood about the surge, from a tactical level. According to the Rep. Hunter, it is all about politics, and has little to do with the surge itself.

We also talked about immigration, as Hunter has one of the toughest stances on this issue in Congress. He spoke of the fence that runs along the San Diego border and how effective it has been. We also asked him what should be done about the Border Agents who have been thrown in jail for a dozen years for shooting a drug smuggler. We took some great calls from WRKO listeners who asked what separated Hunter from the leaders in the GOP race, like McCain, Rudy and Romney.

In the Feb 19 issue of the Weekly Standard, Noemie Emery writes about McCain, Rudy and Romney, and their strengths and weaknesses in this peculiar stage of the presidential race.

Here are the three leading candidates for president in the Republican party, a party based in the South and in the interior, rural in nature, and backed in large part by social conservatives: the senior senator from Arizona, a congenital maverick with friends in the press and a habit of dissing the base of his party; the former governor of deep-blue Massachusetts, son of a Michigan governor, a Mormon who looks, sounds, and comes across as a city boy; and the former mayor of New York, the Big Apple itself, ethnic and Catholic, pro-choice and pro-gun control, married three times, and a man who–Neil Simon, where are you?–moved in with a gay friend and his partner when he was thrown out of Gracie Mansion by his estranged and enraged second wife.

None hails from the South, none looks or sounds country, none is conspicuous for traditional piety, and none is linked closely to social conservatives. At the same time, none is exactly at odds with social conservatives either. None is a moderate, in the sense of being a centrist on anything or wary of conservatives; rather, each is a strong conservative on many key issues, while having a dissident streak on a few. Each has a way of presenting conservative views that centrists don’t find threatening, and projecting fairly traditional values in a language that secular voters don’t fear. In a country that has been ferociously split into two near-equal camps of voters for at least the past decade, this is no small accomplishment, as it suggests the potential to cross cultural barriers, and therefore extend one’s own reach. If one of these men wins, it may mark a return to broader, national parties. And the iconic map of the recent elections, with the blue states draped like a shawl over the broad, red shoulders of Middle America, may give way to more subtle designs.

As an example of the concerns conservatives have with each of these three, in the Hotline this week there was a video clip showing Romney in 2002 clearly proclaiming himself to be pro-choice.

Hunter may not be the flashiest guy in the race, but conservatives don’t need to worry about what Hunter truly believes. He’s one of us. Not for nothing did he win this Arizona straw poll.

As bonus material, here’s Hunter going head to head with MN’s own Rep. Tim Walz.


Posted: February 21, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Under: 2008, elections | 3 Comments »


Bookmark and Share

| Top Of Page

3 Responses to “Duncan Hunter interview”

  1. Gary M. Miller Says:

    Got anything in a size “true conservative who can win”?

  2. Jeff Kouba Says:

    Ah, the eternal struggle. Do we go for someone who can win, or do we stick to our principles and put up somebody who best represents our most closely held beliefs?

    An important consideration, I’ll agree. Part of that Emery article I linked to looks at that question. Yes, one of the three frontrunners might appeal to a wider voter base.

    A Jonah Goldberg column out today suggests Hunter might have a harder time with the likeability test than some of the others.

    On the other hand, Ecker points out there might be support bubbling away out there for Hunter that could grow if people knew more about him. (And once upon a time, campaigns were about getting to know candidates.)

  3. Gary M. Miller Says:

    I played the \”stick to our principles\” card in \’88, \’92, \’96 and \’00. So far I am 0-fer in getting the most principled conservative nominated.

    The only difference between those years and \’08 is that the other candidates had a chance.

    Regrettably, part of being a conservative — per Edmund Burke — is dealing with the world as it is, not as we might like it to be.

    My attempt at \’principle\’ this go-around is simply trying to block the nomination of a global-warming pimpin\’, First Amendment stompin\’, tax-cut hatin\’ liberal like John Sidney McCain.