Rudy restates his support for taxpayer funded abortions

Julie Annie has gone out of his way to restate his support for taxpayer funded abortions. His reasoning is that since it is a "constitutional right" that the government must provide it to those who cannot afford it on their own.

If he honestly believes this then he is simply too stupid to be the president of the United States. The Second Amendment recognized a right to "keep and bear arms". If one is too poor to afford a good quality firearm should the government, even on a "state by state basis" supply him with a gun?

I would love to start a conservative cable news network which would be as far to the right as CNN is to the left (well, not that far as all the on air personell would then have to wear SS uniforms). I don't have the capital to do this, so I want the government to pay for it for me. We also have the right to own real property so I want the government to buy me some lakefront property down in Mecklenburg County, you know the kind that goes for $300,000.00 per acre.

Julie would almost have to be too smart to really believe this. What he is hoping is that the public will be stupid enough to fall for it. He is hoping that social conservatives will be dumb enough to say, "well it is a constitutional right because of Roe v Wade so he will have no choice and it won't really be his fault".

This is the kind of reasoning that Mrs. Bill Clinton would use.

Julie Annie is not fit to be president. Let's get behind Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo and push. HARD.

There are too real conservatives in the race

From The American Spectator:

Duncan Hunter, a solidly conservative U.S. Representative from California since 1980, has a two-part answer for those who say his low name identification and lack of obvious financial wherewithal will doom his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.

First, he says he has the right "three pillars" as issues to build his campaign on: He's the most experienced in standing up for a "strategic national defense." He's the most accomplished on border security. And he is dedicated to "reversing the one-way trade street with China" as part and parcel of a national security effort toward "the restoration of what I call the arsenal of democracy."

Second, Hunter says that "the money will follow the message" rather than vice versa. "Our message is resonating," he says, citing strong results in countywide Republican straw polls in Arizona and South Carolina and frequent national media appearances on shows such as Hardball and Laura Ingraham's radio program -- 17 major appearances in the last week alone, supposedly reaching 18 million viewers or listeners. He says earned media will beget more earned media, which will beget more interested voters and more money: "This whole process is a process of acceleration."

Time will tell on that. What is abundantly clear is that there is no doubt about Hunter's bona fides on his chosen three issues -- or as a conservative on others such as low taxes, restrained spending, the rights to life and to bear arms, and private property rights. He's known as a straight shooter (figuratively and, as a devoted hunter, literally), as a guy who doesn't waffle, and as a diligent legislator. And he's a military man through and through: His father fought in World War II, he himself fought in Vietnam, and his son Duncan D. Hunter recently fought in Iraq -- including during the fierce first battle of Fallujah. (Duncan the son just announced on Wednesday that he plans to run for the House seat from which the presidential candidate is retiring.)

[. . .]

And he remains very much a hawk on Iraq. On March 12, Hunter returned from a visit there and wrote a letter to President George W. Bush proposing a specific course of action to achieve victory. "We are succeeding in Iraq as long as we keep standing up the Iraqi military," he told me in a Tuesday interview. "The best way to stand up a military is with actual operations."

[. . .]

Meanwhile, Hunter is extremely focused on what he describes as a growing threat from China, and he insists that his advocacy of a tougher trade stance against China is not a betrayal of free market principles.

"Reversing the one-way trade street with China will save millions of American jobs and avoid driving billions of dollars to China which its central government is using to develop a formidable military," he said. He said China rebates its own taxes on all of its exported goods, and then imposes taxes on American imports, thus providing about a $34 advantage for every $100 of actual value of its own products. The United States, though, does not impose import duties of that sort, nor does it rebate the taxes on our own exports.

"Republicans are the party of markets, but we're not the party of dumb markets," he said. "Trade agreements are business deals, and it is more important than ever that we have smart business deals. What I am proposing is not protectionism, it's just reciprocity. And it is important because they are using the trade to develop 75-100 short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles each year and to construct a large number of submarines....That's ominous."

Finally, on the third "pillar" of his campaign, Hunter is about as tough on border security as anybody in public life. He was the single driving force behind the tremendously successful double-fence along the border in San Diego, and he was the lead author of legislation passed last year to build a fence across almost the entire U.S.-Mexican border. Again, that's not Wall Street's position. But it's a position supported by a large and vocal portion of the Republican electorate.

I heard him on Andrew Wilkow's show Friday and was impressed. This backs up the point which I've made before, there is still time for a real conservative to step to the front and save the party from Julie Annie and Crazy John.

Until Fred Thompson announces (and maybe after as well) Hunter will be my choice.