Duncan Hunter Interview : Terrorist Trials In NY, Amnesty, Sarah Palin and More !

Duncan Hunter Interview 11-17-09: Terrorist Trials in NY, Amnesty, Sarah Palin and More!

Thanks to Pissant at Free Republic for hosting these great conference call interviews, hope you enjoy them.- red

This interview is the fifth installment of an on going series of conversations with the former Congressman and 2008 presidential candidate. It appears that the extended Idaho retirement vacation is coming to an end. Hunter and his wife Lynne were on the road, driving south through the Beehive State with the ultimate destination of their home in El Cajon, CA. Once again, we used the conference call service that allowed several of us to partake in this unique opportunity to query the man who is perhaps the most solid and consistent conservative legislator to have served our nation in modern times.

AUTOMATRON: Someone has joined the conference.

DH: Hello, Duncan Hunter here.

AJM: Hello Mr. Hunter. This is Jim. We’ve got Lynn on the line from Ohio. And Don from Denver.

DH: Hello Lynn, how you doing?

LD: Good

DH: Hello Don.

DF: Hi Congressman Hunter, good to talk to you again.

AJM: And we might have a few stragglers joining in later. I’ll just tell them to keep quiet when they come on.

DH: OK. Now I’m steaming down highway 15. If I go out it’s because we got to a canyon area, but we should be clear for awhile.

AJM: OK. We’ll see how well those Mormons build cellular systems.

DH: We’ll find out.

AJM: Can we complain to Romney if it falls apart? (laughs). Before I get to any questions I just have a couple of things I wanted to inform you about. One, is that after we talked last time, and you mentioned Gunny Pop Popaditch, I went ahead and posted a news article from the local papers down there talking about your guys’ event and it got massive numbers of views. People were excited, and I saw it popping up all over the blogosphere. So you guys are making hay just in your first week.

DH: Great. Way to go Jim.

AJM. Yeah, there was really a sense of excitement on Free Republic and throughout the blogs on this guy. Everyone remembers him from the picture!

DH: He’s a solid guy. He’s a great speaker too. Very inspirational.

AJM: The funny thing is, I watched a little newscast from the TV that someone put up on Youtube. And it had you in it, you were interviewed as well! But he said that you are the one that inspired him to run.

DH: Oh oh (laughs)

AJM: So hats off to you!

DH: OK. He’s a good guy. We’ve got several more marines who are running too. We hope we bring them home. When I say bring them home, I don’t mean bring them home from Iraq…..

AJM: You mean bring them home into the party and into the Congress…

DH: Yeah.

AJM: The other piece of news that I wanted to mention was that there was an article in some local paper, I have it linked but I don’t remember which paper it was. But there was a guy calling out for your son, Duncan D., to be the Vice Presidential nominee this next go ‘round.

DH: Really?? Did you recognize Duncan’s writing style?

ALL: (laughing)

AJM: Actually, I was suspected you more than him.

DH: (laughing) No. I’m a good spear carrier for him now. I’m looking forward to having an appointment with him sometime in the next two months. I’m just another constituent now.

AJM: OK. I’m going to start off with a question. The first one that has been all over the news the last few days is Mr. Obama’s “deep bow” to the emperor of Japan. Were you able to see that?

DH: No, I didn’t see his bow.

AJM: Did you hear about it?

DH: No, tell me about it.

AJM: Well, he was over in Japan along with some other world leaders, and when it was his turn to go up, he bent down at the waist so far I thought he was going to bite the emperor’s kneecap. And he’s got some real harsh criticism from a lot of people, including Dick Cheney and some other conservatives. Even the liberal press has been mocking him. Remember, this isn’t the first time. He also bowed to the Saudi King, and a lesser bow to Vladimir Putin. So what do you think is his agenda with these bows?

DH: Well, I like MacArthur’s model. I think MacArthur had the right model for dealing with the Japanese royalty when he basically reconstituted the country. That was to treat them politely but firmly and not in some subservient manner. I thought MacArthur had the right professional approach.

I didn’t see the news flash on Mr. Obama’s greeting to the emperor. Maybe he’s getting some bad protocol advice. But I like the MacArthur style. He certainly didn’t do any bowing. He wasn’t cruel. He was statesman-like. In fact, one of the great models of this country for all time, for occupying militaries, was the occupation of Japan. After we had taken Japan, the warlords warned the people to expect treatment as cruel as that which they had doled out. I believe they killed 100,000 people in Nanking, China in one night, when they took Nanking. They obviously brutalized American POWs. They killed roughly one third of our POWs in captivity. And they expected the same brutal treatment as Japan lay prostrate before the American forces. Yet, the American troops walked down the streets of Tokyo handing out Hershey Bars. And there were practically no incidents of brutality or cruelty to the Japanese population. That was a great model and reflected the goodness of this country more than anything else we did during the war.

AJM: So do you think Obama’s bow is just being overly polite, ignorant, or he just wants to apologize to some degree for…

DH: (laughs) I don’t know if you noticed or not, Jim, but I’m not in his inner circle, so I don’t know!

ALL: (laughing)

DH: But from a positive point of view, I like the MacArthur approach. He was professional, firm, non-subservient to the emperor of Japan. And remember, the emperor of Japan had launched massive attacks. His warlords had been the engineers and strategist of that offensive against the United States, but the emperor condoned it. And I think we treated him magnanimously simply to allow him to keep his position and to maintain the structure that attends that office in Japan. But MacArthur had the right idea. He had an audience with the emperor, and he certainly wasn’t subservient, and he dealt with him from an arm’s length position and I think that was the right model, not Mr. Obama’s.

AJM: Very good. You’re probably aware of this one. It’s been announced in the news with several stories coming out of the Pelosi camp and the Obama administration that they are going to revisit amnesty in the next few weeks. They are working diligently on the next amnesty plan and I’m sure they’ll have some of the same republicans involved with this – namely Lindsey Graham and McCain and some of the other same cast of characters. So this thing actually has a lot of support when you toss in those republicans. What is your opinion on this and what should we do to fight it?

DH: I think there will be a large backlash against this. Especially among rank and file democrats during this high unemployment period. I’ll never forget a construction worker, an American citizen coming up to me one time, a member of the Hispanic community, and said “please don’t let”–what was known in those days as Kennedy/McCain- “this thing pass”. This guy explained that it had taken him years to get to the point where he was making $35/hr. And he said “if you open the floodgates, I’ll go down to $15 an hour, and my ability to take care of my family will diminish”. He said that in so many words.

Especially when you have a massive unemployment rate, the idea that we are going to open the floodgates is insane. That’s what you do when you entertain amnesty. We’ve seen the number of crossings, illegal border crossings increase when the President even TALKS about it, talks about amnesty. It’s human nature. The people that came over in the 80s, when we gave amnesty to some 3 million people – and we incidentally at that point, we said ‘now THIS IS IT, this time we really mean it and we are gonna enforce our borders’. And people knew we didn’t really mean it; so about 12 million more came pouring in subsequent to that admonishment that we were now going to enforce the borders in a serious way, and that there would be no more amnesty.

So when you announce an amnesty there will always be a new wave people coming over illegally, human nature being what it is, anticipating that they – the new wave- will catch the next amnesty. So at a time when jobs are very, very difficult to find, especially blue collar jobs, the idea that we are opening the floodgates again is something the American people will not accept.

And I know the democrat strategists are looking to… thinking they are going to pickup a new, huge voting constituency. I don’t think so. Last hired is often first fired. And there are lots of folks in the Hispanic community like the guy who approached me, the construction worker, who are worried about their jobs and the rate of pay.

AJM: So you think the backlash will stop it once again?

DH: I think so.

AJM: Because the last one we weren’t in a recession, the economy was booming and we still managed to stop it. But it took a lot of vocal leadership, people like you congressman, frankly, being probably the premier spokesman against it. It definitely rallied the troops. Talk radio finally got on it, and even a lot of democrats opposed it.

DH: I think we’ll get more now. I think the economic dimension will play out strongly at this point.

AJM: I sure hope so. Even the Reagan model, which you voted against by the way, the 1986 amnesty, there was the promise of border enforcement. I can’t imagine that these democrats writing this next bill will…..they’ve already gutted your Secure Fence Act several times over. What’s your take on getting some real border enforcement? Are we going to have to wait for the next Republican in office?

DH: I think it is clear that this administration does not want a secure border. And it is always difficult to understand their point of view. But it is clear from their initiatives, and the lack of interest in completing the border fence. The way most of the amnesty initiatives have been framed, proponents always promise that enforcement will go hand in hand with the amnesty. But I think at this point all the political proponents of amnesty have lost their credibility.

We had a Secure Fence Act, which was watered down massively. We got some fence up, some 100s of miles of some barrier, which has been good. Incidentally, we sealed up Smugglers Gulch in San Diego with the double fence. And when we did that, the crime rate in the city of San Diego, by FBI statistics, after we built the fence, fell by more than 53 percent. The apprehensions went down by more than 90 percent!

The point is that fences do work. And another point is that the then governor of Arizona, Governor Napolitano, swung back and forth between saying “fences don’t work” – saying “if you show me a 12 foot fence, I’ll show you a 13 foot ladder”, and in the next sentence she would lament the fact that we (California) were sealing our border so the illegal aliens were now going to her state of Arizona and crossing.

ALL: (laughs)

DH: She not only tried to have it both ways, but literally she tried to have it both ways in almost the same sentence (laughing).

In fact, in Yuma, Arizona, the one sector that they fenced there, as I recall, apprehensions went down from almost 138,000 in that sector to 3,800, after they did the fence.

AJM: That’s amazing. But you know the problem with Napolitano, don’t you? She got a promotion, a promotion from governor; she’s the head of Homeland Security. What a disaster.

DH: Yeah. I’m aware of that. The same person who discounted the fence, and resented the fact that we had one. So no, she’s not going to lead with a construction program.

AJM: That’s for sure. But do you have any words for your own party? My recollection is that the Secure Fence Act, the watering down of that, actually took place in the hands of Kay Bailey Hutchinson and John Cornyn.

DH: Yeah. We had the two Texas senators, with the Texas border literally on fire with the smuggling of people and narcotics, fold. And I don’t know where they got their direction. The President (Bush) had essentially the same position – they didn’t want to fence Texas. You had at one time I recall, some 600 unsolved murders in Nuevo Laredo. That’s the drug town immediately across from Laredo, Texas. Massive smuggling. Yet inexplicable disinterest on the part of Kay Bailey and John Cornyn. Good members of congress, strong on defense, generally folks that I agree with; but also the governor, Governor Perry was not an advocate of the fence.

I think they were all talking to the landowners who probably liked the idea of having a fairly large pool of people coming across the border to work inexpensively.

My point to the President, and to the Senators during the conference on this fence, was that a landowner on the border, or a rancher on the border, does not have the right to determine unilaterally what the immigration policy of this country is going to be. And just because that means that he gets some inexpensive people, he’s NOT the guy to be sorting out the people who may at one point be terrorists, or who may be the drug people, and determining who comes into the United States. The policy of the United States is deeper and is more important than the desires of a landowner to have some inexpensive labor coming in to his ranch from Mexico.

AJM: I’ll agree with that. I want to reiterate the fact that they’ve been catching a lot of non-mexicans, what do they call them, OTMs – Other Than Mexicans. A lot of Chinese coming…

DH: That’s always been the case. Everybody in the world knows if you want to get into America illegally, you use the southern border of the United States to do it. You don’t come through LA International Airport anymore. They understand that. That’s a MAJOR problem. So what we’ve got to do is we’ve got to elect a bunch of conservative Republicans in this next race. Obviously, we need to take Congress back!

And I think that’s possible. The swings, the nature of politics is to surprise. And I think we can have a surprising resurgence in the House races in this next election.

AJM: I sure hope so. And the guys you’ve been promoting are also, all of them, are strong border hawks. In the Hunter mold, as opposed to the McCain mold of wanting to grant amnesty. So keep up that work, Congressman. In the primaries, we need people that are going to do it right, and not waffle once they office.

DH: Yep. We need to do just that. We also need to – you know I’m looking forward to a lot more guys getting out of the service, and running for office across the country. That’s an important dimension to representation, especially when you have the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq at the level they are at right now. Having people, wearing the uniform, shedding that uniform, running for office then becoming representatives I think is an important part of American society. And we have a paucity of military folks coming into Congress.

AJM: Well, that would be great. So what is your opinion on the RNC, the national party, picking sides in a primary? I think I told you when Charlie Crist of Florida came out – he’s kind of a liberal, so-so guy but a fairly popular governor – as soon as he announced the, Senatorial committee, the NRSC, immediately endorsed him even though there were already guys running in that race. This has been repeated a number of times. What is your opinion of the National party endorsing candidates in a primary?

DH: Well, I think there needs to be a balance. Sometimes they need to go out and recruit candidates to run. Especially when you have great candidates you think should run for office. For example, Eisenhower was actively recruited by the national party – I’m probably using the best example of recruitment – but Eisenhower was recruited by the national Republicans to run on the GOP ticket. And I think when they initially talked with him, they weren’t sure if he was a Democrat or Republican. And as I recall, the Democrats had an interest in trying to get Eisenhower to run also. So that’s probably the best example of a national recruitment.

In a number of races you do want to go out – for example I went out and asked old Gunny Pop. I think he was inclined to run, but I told him he’d make a great Congressman and I encouraged him to run. I think that’s important. If you do that, you do need to endorse them when they run. But in terms of simply going with the….if somebody is already predisposed to run and they are running and there are other good candidates out there running, the idea that you try to anoint someone, I think, is a mistake.

Incidentally, I like Bob Smith who is the former New Hampshire US Senator. He was great on Armed Services and on the military…

AJM: Yeah, he’s running too, but he’s not getting much…

DH: Yeah, I know he’s not. But he’s a friend of mine. But beyond that he knows National Defense in depth, especially missile defense. He has a much better handle on national security issues than the other candidates.

AJM: That’s for sure. OK. That answers that. Somebody had asked me, who could not attend this conference, to ask you a question regarding Sarah Palin. I don’t know if you’ve turned on a TV lately, but she’s everywhere. She’s got a new book just released today – number 1 bestseller. She’s on Oprah and Barbara Walters and basically it is her re-introduction after she quit her governorship. So what do you think about Sarah Palin and her future in the Republican Party?

DH: You know, I don’t know Governor Palin well. And I’m not close to their campaign. So I don’t know her well enough to comment on what her strategy may be for the next couple of years. But I think she provided some energy to the Republican Party. And I think she has provided a strong role model for conservative women who want to get involved in politics, and to take the fight back to the liberal feminist side which has dominated Democratic politics.

So I think Sarah Palin was a refreshing contrast to the model that the liberal media was shoving at us as to what women in politics should be. She represented independence, individualism. I don’t know, I’m not familiar with all of her activities as a governor in Alaska so it’s tough to comment on that.

But I think, generally speaking, she’s a refreshing new presence on the political scene and I wish her well.

AJM: Very good. The suggestion was that we’d send her up to Idaho – she’s from Idaho originally as a little kid – and you’d take her hunting. Not only could you guys have a good time hunting together, but that you could impart some of your military and foreign policy wisdom to her at that time. One of the criticisms of her, fair or not, was she doesn’t have a full grasp on certain aspects of what the Presidency entails when it comes to foreign policy or military affairs, national security, sovereignty, the types of things you’re known for. So we’d love to send her up to you at some point at least to meet. Would you be interested in meeting her?

DH: (Laughs) Well, of course. Listen; there are lots of people that have information, that have good backgrounds in national security who could brief up Sarah Palin.

I thought in the debates and interviews that she needed to have three or four positions that are classic republican, conservative positions, like Peace through Strength, and she needed to assert those. And remember Charlie Gibson, I think, was the first major interview that Sarah Palin did. I think she needed to assert those strongly, and stake out conservative positions, rather than kind of trying to handle the volleys that the media was throwing at her. I would have had a little different strategy going in to that.

But you know, I think Sarah Palin did a good job in the campaign. And certainly the campaign was in tough shape when Sarah Palin came onto the ticket. I think she was value added. Absolutely.

AJM: No doubt about that. The reason I’m pushing a date, a pairing with you whether it ever happens or not – who knows. The feeling is amongst the people that know your work, Congressman, is that you differentiate yourself from the vast, vast majority of Republicans, as well as from the conservative pundits by your actual, intimate knowledge, and your Reaganesque views on US sovereignty, weapons systems, and military matters – and that does not even include the border where sometimes you were the ONLY one, maybe along with Tancredo lately, fighting for us. So those are the things that attracted real conservatives to you. So obviously, we want to see the next – whoever is going to run for president – get closer to the Reagan/Hunter model. What we don’t need is another McCain/Giuliani model coming up.

DH: (laughing) Well listen, I think you are going to have some new blood in this next race.

AJM: I think so too.

LD: Better be good blood!

DH: If we can just get Duncan to quit writing in and suggesting himself for Vice President.

ALL: (Laughs)

DH: People are going to start to recognize his writing style. (laughs) No , I’m just kidding. He’s actually a very modest guy. He’s a great guy and is working really hard right now on the IED issue which is really damaging our troops in Afghanistan. He just got back from there about a week and a half ago, so that’s kind of the order of the day for him.

AJM: Yeah, he’s following in your footsteps on that, thank goodness.

Another issue that is current news is that apparently Mr. Holder and Mr. Obama decided to bring Khalid Sheik Mohammed to New York for a trial, affording him all the rights of a US citizen. What is your take on this nonsense?

DH: I think we had, we put together the terrorist tribunal, and I participated in putting that law together as the chairman of the Armed Services Committee on the House side. And I think we did it right. The defendants have lots of rights, the right to cross examine, the right against self-incrimination, and the right -except where classified evidence might be compromised – to confront their accusers. They had lots of rights. If you look at the Rwandan model and the Nuremberg model where we prosecuted war criminals, they have as many rights in our military tribunal system that we set up as the defendants in those two forums.

Now when you bring people to America, there are certain additional rights that attach because you are basically here. I think it is a mistake to bring him to New York and to give them all the protections of American criminals. One reason is this: If you take a batch of POWs that we’ve captured on the battlefield of a shooting war, people that wore uniforms, and you demanded that we had to release them unless we could prove that each and every one of them, prove beyond a reasonable doubt that everyone of them was actually in the act carrying out war against the Americans, we would never be able to prove a lot of those cases!

In the first place, war is a confusing thing. You don’t go back and recreate crime scenes when you get your Humvee blown up, or you have shots taken at you in the remote areas of Afghanistan. You can’t give a guy Miranda rights before you question him. Somebody’s life may depend on him answering those questions. And so you really give people when you afford them complete criminal rights in America, you are giving them a lot more rights than a soldier gets.

We now live in this age of terrorism, and we’ve got to find our way between the desire to give people massive rights when we are prosecuting them or else free them. Between that extreme and rights you afford somebody when they are wearing a uniform and engaging you in a direct fight. It is unusual that we are actually giving more rights to the guys who blew up women and children in a very cowardly way than are given to uniformed troops who march out to the battlefield and fight for their country in the open. But that is essentially what we are doing.

And we ought to keep Guantanamo going. Guantanamo is EXACTLY the right place for these guys. They all gained weight at Guantanamo. They have lots of sports and athletics. They have taxpayer paid prayer rugs, Korans, they have the loud speaker. As I recall when I was down there it was giving prayer call something like five times a day over the prison loudspeaker system. If that would have been a Baptist prayer call the ACLU would have gone nuts, but it was a muslim prayer call so it was OK.

The point is that they were very well taken care of. And the idea that we somehow acquiesce to this very fuzzy “world opinion” – a world opinion made up of foreign leaders who like the idea of the Americans always doing the heavy lifting when it comes to fighting terrorism – they want to offer up all these objections to Guantanamo.

The interesting thing about Guantanamo is that of all the major prisons in the world, it’s the only prison, the only major prison, where there’s never been a murder. It’s probably the only prison where people also gain weight. It’s also got a medical system there that is better than most American’s HMOs to take care of people medically.

The question is “what are we doing?”.

And the answer is that we are satisfying a perception. And it’s a perception that really isn’t held genuinely by the people that utter that perception. That is leftist foreign leaders who complain about Guantanamo. They like us going after the terrorists, doing the heavy lifting, and they want to sit back and issue press releases saying ‘when you catch these murderers treat them very humanely, take care of them- and incidentally you Americans pay for it all – and we in other parts of the world will monitor your progress in terms of humanitarianism.’

AJM: Well listen, the world leaders might not be true believers in this social justice therapy and extra rights for terrorists, but I tell you what, President Obama and Eric Holder sure are. They are moving farther and faster than the world criticism and it was part of his campaign. I think it’s an overall ‘tearing down’ of structures that have been wisely built up over the years, starting with the Geneva Conventions for warfare, and precedent in US military affairs. Everything he touches he tears down. I think its part of his agenda.

DH: Yeah. Well with respect to Guantanamo, it’s the old saying “when the truth conflicts with the legend – print the legend”. I do not agree with the policy of pretending that a fiction or a myth is real in order to satisfy public opinion. We did NOT torture people in Guantanamo. If you ask the relevant authorities if dogs ever bit people in Guantanamo, the answer is “no”, or “once” at one point. People were not tortured at Guantanamo. They’ve generally been taken very good care of.

We’ve had tons of delegations visting Guantanamo. I remember Madeleine Bordallo who was the representative from Guam walked out of the trip I took down there – she was one of our congressional delegation members – and said at the press conference, “this place is a country club”. Of course, that’s the ‘wrong’ thing to say if you are going to be politically correct, but she’s a pretty gutsy lady. And she’s a democrat, incidentally, and told it like it was. We treat people very well in Guantanamo, and yet we’re acknowledging this myth, this legend, and treating it like it’s true. The legend that invokes images of people being chained and beaten and whipped – it’s just nuts.

AJM: Yep. And when you say “we”, it’s people like Dick Durbin and some of the more liberal democrats in addition to the Obama administration. They are going against the grain of American wisdom.

DH: Dick Durbin has had scores of murders in his prisons, and I don’t think he recommends closing them down! You know, and these people that say you shouldn’t use dogs – shouldn’t have dogs present – If you ask them if they are going to recommend closing down their K9 units in their own police departments in the states they represent, the answer would be an absolute NO. And if you don’t think a 110 pound German Shepherd – they say it’s torture to intimidate people with the presence of a dog – having a massive German Shepherd snapping at you six inches from your face, I think it tends to make you want to talk.

ALL: (laughs)

DH: I think lots of people have made lots of confessions with that 110 pound German Shepherd snapping away while the police officer of Illinois, Senator Durbin’s state, or lots of others, routinely goes through his Miranda warnings.

The Guantanamo situation is a tragedy. It is a situation in which they are pretending something happened which did not happen; trying to solve a problem which doesn’t exist, all to make people like us. In the end that never works.

AJM: Absolutely. Hey, Lynn or Don, do either of you guys have a quick question. We’ve got to let Congressman Hunter go here in just a second.

DH: Lynn, how are you doing Lynn? What’s on your mind today?

LD: (laughs) You don’t want to know. I must say that I was aware of you even though I lived in Virginia, long before you ran for the presidency. But I must tell you the day that I absolutely fell in love with you was when I saw you on CSPAN after you had been to Gitmo, and you served those halal meals. And I was like: “this is the man we need!”

DH: Now I did what now?

LD: You were on CSPAN talking about how you had just returned from Gitmo….

DH: (laughs) Oh yeah, we had the menu. And we had the House of Representatives cooks prepare the Guantanamo menu…

LD: Yes!!

DH: and I think it was honey glazed chicken and rice pilaf (laughs)

LD: Yes it was (laughing)

DH: Another bread and water meal for those terrorists! Yeah, that helped put the damper on that particular little surge of support for closing Guantanamo.

AJM: That “surge” was led by your buddy John McCain, by the way…

LD: That was my point.

DH: Well, the media really liked to use John McCain. I think it’s a little unfair to ask a guy who has been a POW how he wants people to be treated; to account for what our policy should be. It’s almost like going to a mother who has lost her son in a war, and asking “do you think we should still be there?” It’s almost unfair to ask him that question.

I always felt that John was, in my opinion, on the wrong side of that answer. And I’ve always though it’s a little bit phony for the media to ask him.

AJM: Well they (media) loved him up until the time he won the nomination, then they turned on him.

DH: That’s what happens to Republicans. You know, they also love us after we are dead.

ALL: (laughing)

DH: Barry Goldwater was absolutely treated in a despicable way, fashioned by the media. I mean there should have been a massive backlash when they had that commercial there during the Johnson race where it showed the little girl picking the flowers and a nuclear cloud erupts behind her; with the implication that Barry Goldwater was gonna nuke the world. I mean they just hammered him and called him dangerous and all kinds of names. But once he was retired, and after he died he became a ‘conservative statesman’. The media loved to issue these very ‘late in career’ statements of his – and we’re not sure if his nurse wrote them or he wrote ‘em (laughs) – he now had a liberal point of view on everything. So they loved Barry Goldwater after he left.

AJM: Yeah, he got old and started losing his marbles and all the sudden they quote him…

DH: I don’t know if Barry even made those statements. I mean I didn’t ever hear him make statements like those.

AJM: Same with Reagan. Now they love Reagan. But boy did they hate him. They hated him more than they hated George W. Bush.

DH: Yeah, they did…

LD: Oh, I don’t think anyone has been more hated than George W. Bush.

AJM: I don’t know. What do you think?

DH: (laughs) Isn’t it sad that we as conservatives have to sit around and decide which one of us was hated the most??

ALL: (laughs)

DF: Yes, which one is more hated.

LD: Yes, it is! And I just want to say one more thing about the whole John McCain and the media thing. No one loved manipulating him more than he did himself. He was a willing participant. And I will not excuse what he did. I mean a ‘terrorist bill of rights’?? And the ‘screw you President Bush’ law he got passed. Please people. I’m not very politically correct, congressman.

DH: The terrorist tribunal thing we put in place, was put in place by the House and the Senate. We did a lot of that stuff. I thought it was tough, fair…

LD: No, no! That’s not what the one I’m talking about.

DH: …and had a process for a speedy prosecution of these guys…

LD: That’s not the one I’m talking about.

DH: Oh, OK. Well listen, if there’s one thing us politicians do, is we always want to spend our dime talking about ourselves rather than the other guys. (laughs)

I like John McCain personally. I’ve served with him for a long time. I don’t agree with him, obviously, on many, many issues. But he’s a guy I got to know and was a good guy when he was in the House of Representatives. A good guy, personally. But my sense is John’s not going to be running for office in this next presidential campaign.

DF: I sure hope not.

DH: I think you are going to have a new crop. So beating up on John McCain is probably not going to do much. I believe in getting after John and his policies when I was running against him. But I’m not running against him now and I don’t think you are going to see him run for national office again. Could be wrong. (laughs)

AJM: Oh no no no no. We are knocking on wood right now!

DF: Can I sneak one in on you Congressman Hunter – Don in Denver.

DH: Yeah, go ahead Don.

DF: Continuing on the same line, give us some hope for the future for change. Let’s assume for a moment, let’s play ‘what if’. I think the pendulum is swinging back the other way. I see more and more resistance to the destruction of our country that is currently underway. Assume for a minute we get some control in 2010 –we being Republicans. Then in 2012 Obama is a one term president, much like his hero Jimmy Carter, and his successor is a true conservative, like a Reagan, or for this conversation even you. What would be your hopeful message to us out here that indeed, no matter what the destruction is right now, this country can be rebuilt? It’s the greatest country in the world I believe, and some of these things can be rolled back, that we can push that pendulum back the other way.

DH: The pendulum is coming back. It always does. And we all know about the statistics of off year elections, and the fact that the party not in the Whitehouse usually grabs a few seats back, picks up a few seats. The key is to turn a victory, to turn the tide into an overwhelming victory that allows you to take back control of the House. That’s what you need.

We need to maximize our gains and our strengths in this next election cycle. The democrats think they’ll lose a few seats, but they want to keep it at a few. Sometimes a ‘victory is keeping your losses at 10 seats or 12 seats, or 15 seats. We need to make sure that we have the best candidates. We have to make sure we don’t have a lot of interparty warfare.

For example, one thing that bothered me, let me give you some congressional dynamics. When I ran against a guy named Lionel Van Deerlin in 1980, I sold my house to run because I couldn’t raise any money. And this is a guy who won fairly handily over his 18 year career. In the seat I ran for, which was only 29 percent Republican, you had to draw straws to see who HAD to run as a Republican. The district next door was a good Republican district. It had good numbers and the Republican who won the primary would probably win. So you had Republicans spending millions fighting for the seat which was a sure thing in terms of being an ‘R’. And in the seat which we needed to take, which is the one that I took from Lionel Van Deerlin, we had no help from the party. So that’s a problem we’ve always had. We end up spending a ton of money and resources going after safe Republican seats. I know it’s always going to happen, because we are all independent contractors, and everybody’s got a right to run. But being able to spend resources, to reserve resources for those take-able seats is very, very important. Because you really do have to run the equivalent of a 50 state strategy in congressional districts if you want to take back the House, where you win seats that you didn’t anticipate winning. We have got to take some of those marginal seats back!

DF: Let’s say we do those back and get back control like you’re talking about and the pendulum pushes the other way and a good conservative is in power. Where to you begin to rebuild and restore this country, to what we, you and I, the people on this phone I know, love and want and that is our vision of this country. Can it be pushed back? Can the destruction be repaired?

DH: Well certainly. Congress can pass a law, and repeal a law with a vote, and the president can sign that law. So the answer to how far we’re going to have to roll this thing back is a function to some degree with what happens to things like this Health Bill that’s going forward right now. Let’s fight and hope they don’t get it. But they may have a lot of things that we’ll have to roll back. But I would say let’s roll back all the inhibitors to economic growth.

One thing that I think we should do though is that….the post ’73 Republicans broke away from the party and broke away from our traditions. I think this blind adherence to this concept of so-called ‘free trade’ has been a disaster for the United States. You’re talking in a phone now, if your phone costs a hundred bucks and the same phone is made in China that’s made in the United States. If you make that in China and you send it to the United States for sale, the Chinese government rebates 17 percent back to you in Value Added Tax, if you export to the US. If you are an exporter from the US trying to sell in China, you get 17 percent added to your cost when you cross the docks in China. That’s a 34 point spread, with respect to exports.

Our industrial base is being exported to China. I think that’s a mistake. In fact it’s kind of funny; the Red Army is winning, but they are not winning on the battlefield, they are winning in a move – in regimented fashion – with jobs in China that were formerly held by Americans in this country. So the lack of jobs, lack of blue collar jobs, the lack of manufacturing jobs is to a large degree behind a lot of other problems. For example, the housing industry. To have a solid, healthy housing industry, requires at the base of the pyramid workers who can afford to pay mortgages. And as you evaporate the industrial base of this country – and manufacturers in this country have traditionally been a higher paid sector than service – as you evaporate this constituency of homeowners who because they have good jobs, pay mortgages, you damage the homebuilding industry. Very substantially.

So I think trade is a place where we can work on. You know, I told the President when he wanted me to vote on the South American ‘free trade’ agreement, I said “you know, I like the Bush policy on trade, but it is the policy of Senator Prescott Bush, who in 1962 stood with Barry Goldwater against the Kennedy Trade Liberalization Act”.

And in this country, if you look at the two Republicans on Mount Rushmore, both of them were against this idea of free trade. They liked the idea of protecting American workers. Two of our greatest presidents, arguably. So this Republican adherence to free trade where we are shipping our industry overseas as fast as we can is a mistake. And the problem is democrats have taken it on too. I had the bill that would have allowed for punishment of China, for sanctions against China, for artificially keeping their currency low in order to destroy American exports and boost their exports. Democrats always talked about moving that bill rapidly. When they took control, after they did a few fundraisers on Wall Street, they lost their enthusiasm for my bill.

ALL: (laughs)

DH: And they never did have a vote on it.

DF: As I recall, you were virtually the lone voice in the last campaign talking about the trade deficit and the issues with China and their arming up. From what I can tell, you continue to be that.

DH: Well, our problem is we need to make sure the Republicans remember their roots. We haven’t traditionally been the free traders. If you go to the cellar of the Capital Hill Club and you look at the old cartoons from the 1890s and early 1900s, you’ll see the one with Teddy Roosevelt standing over a prostrate Grover Cleveland type – I don’t know if it was Grover himself – but Grover Cleveland has “free trade” on his boxing gloves and he’s being knocked out by the Republican, who has got “protection”. And you know now ‘protection’ is used in a pejorative way. But what a national government is with respect to trade is the one time when they are essentially a business representative. Because an individual businessman can’t leave Provo, Utah and go negotiate his own rules for trade with the government of China. When you deal with international trade, our government is your business advocate; it has to be your business advocate. It has to do the right thing with respect to making sure your guys have a level chance of winning in this world trade now. Anyway, that’s a place where the Republican party still needs to find its roots.

AJM: Just to add to this and top it off, Congressman, Ronald Reagan said “we’ll trade with anyone, but we’ll never be anyone’s ‘trade patsy’”. And that’s what we’ve become.

DH: Yeah. Ronald Reagan also said, “when one side is cheating, there is no free trade”. The other sides treat like crazy! We’ve allowed this one VAT, this value added tax rebate, where every other country in the world rebates value added taxes from 10 to 20 percent. We’ve got 122 trading partners that do that. Yet we don’t get to rebate our income tax to our guys that export. Big, big disparity.

AJM: A big, big disparity, and brought on by this creation of this supra-national entity called the WTO, and we give them the power which is supposed by the US Congress’ constitutional duty!

DH: Yeah, I agree with that. And incidentally guys, we’re pulling into St. George and we are going to enter the Cracker Barrel in just a few minutes here. It’s going to be great. So I need to say adios to everybody, but it’s been great talking to you.

AJM: Well thank you very much and we’ll try again next week sometime at your convenience and we have lots of questions to get through. You’ve been very generous.

DH: Hey listen. Great to talk to everybody.

AJM: Say hi to your wife and tell her thank you for being so patient with us (laughs)

DH: OK. I will!

Duncan Hunter Interview 11-10-09: Gunny Pop, Afghanistan, Terrorism & Political Correctness!!

I was privileged to be invited to participate in a series of conference call interviews with 2008 Presidential conservative hopeful Duncan Hunter.

For those who don't know or recall Duncan Hunter was the candidate Ann Coulter described as "magnificent" and who Michael Reagan said is "most like my father".

Here is the conference call interview as published by the moderator pissant at Free Republic.com-

"We finally pulled it off. We managed to have a conference call, as opposed to a randomly timed interview with the former Congressman. Not only that, he was in his hometown of San Diego for a change; if only for a brief stint. Hunter interrupted his weeks long vacation in Idaho to hit Texas last Saturday for a speech celebrating the 234th birthday of the United States Marine Corps. He then traveled back to San Diego to introduce the next Congressman (hopefully) for the 51st Congressional district of California – war hero and staunch conservative Nick Popaditch – to the good people of San Diego County. (He really picked a good one here). Popaditch will attempt to unseat liberal democrat and Pelosi sycophant Bob Filner. We wish him the best of luck in this endeavor.

Unfortunately, because of technical errors on the moderator’s part (me), only 34 minutes of the interview was recorded, and therefore subject to transcribing. The balance of the interview, as you will see, is simply summations. They are, however, summations based on notes and memories of the 5 of us who participated in the conference call. I promise to upgrade the recording techniques and equipment going forward.

Anyway, several of us were already on the conference call line, waiting for Mr. Hunter to join us. He was running late, unsurprisingly, considering his busy day.

Here is what transpired last night:

****************

Automatron: Someone has joined the conference call.

AJM: Let’s take a guess who that might be (laughter).

DH: Hunter here (laughing). Hi everybody.

AJM: Oh boy, your fan club is here, Mr. Hunter.

DH: Oh oh. Both of them? (laughing). Are they relatives?

ALL: (laughing)

AJM: I’ll tell you what, why don’t we do a quick introduction. Everyone knows who you are. I think we have five people on the line. Ladies, why don’t you go first.

GW: I’m Gloria from Ohio

DH: Hey Gloria

GW: Hi!

LD: Lynn from NE Ohio. I met you in DC at that private little dinner in September of 07 with Captain Bailey.

DH: Oh Great.

AJM: The one that was supposed to be twelve people but turned out to be forty?

LD: Yeah, that one.

DH: That’s great.

DF: I’m Don ******, Congressman Hunter. It’s an honor to talk to you. I’m in Denver Colorado, and I run a blog called Red Stater. I’ve been a fan of yours since the get go.

DH: Hey, thanks Don.

RS: Russell *****, from the Fort Worth Dallas metroplex in Texas. Pleasure to meet you this evening Congressman Hunter. And I run three blogs and I’ve been an avid supporter for many years. I come originally from Mesa, California, graduated from UCLA. I’m well in tune with your career, and I’ll turn it back to the moderator.

DH: Hey, Russell, I just left Texas. I spoke at the Marine Birthday bash, for the 14th Marine regiment out of the Dallas/Fort Worth, what was it…..Saturday night.

RS: Oh, that’s fabulous. But I love that country out there (California). I left in 68 and went on to South Dakota and ran a big cattle ranch before I got into the oil and gas industry. But anyway, I do want to take this moment just to thank you for your service, and your sons’ service to this country, and everything you do for this country.

DH: Well listen, you’re very kind. And I want to tell all of you it’s been kind of a neat day. I came back from the Texas thing, and today I went down to San Diego to the kickoff, and helped to kickoff the campaign of a real American hero. And that’s Gunnery Sergeant Nick Popaditch. If you remember the AP photo they had of the statue of Saddam coming down, when the Marines were there in Baghdad Square, and there was a picture, an AP Photo, of a Marine Gunnery Sergeant smoking a cigar in the hatch of an M1 tank, while the statue behind him was going down; that was Nick Popaditch.

And later he was in some real tough fighting in Falluja. And he won the Silver Star. He was hit by an RPG, badly wounded, initially blinded totally, but got about 30% of his sight back in one eye. Great guy, wonderful wife April. And they are running for Congress here in San Diego. And we kicked off his campaign here today in San Diego. Then we drove over the mountain to Imperial County. This district goes all the way from San Diego to Arizona. So we went over the mountain into Imperial County and kicked off the campaign there on the courthouse steps.

It was a great day and Nick, he is the Grand Marshall at the San Diego Veteran’s Parade tomorrow. So that will help him a lot. But he’s got a good chance to win this seat, presently held by a very liberal guy, Bob Filner.

AJM: We know Bob.

DH: We call him Bad Bob, and we’ve got a great chance of beating him. It’s a conservative district, democrat by registration, but conservative democrat. Lots and lots of veterans here.

Gunny Nick Popaditch is just a superb speaker. He is a Ronald Reagan type speaker. Just a tremendous, tremendous guy. I heard him initially give a speech at an event where they raised $350,000 for wounded Marines. And I mean he got a 10 minute standing ovation. And I said “where did this guy come from?” Well, he ended up deciding to run for Congress here, and I think he’s going to end up being one of the winners this next cycle.

GW: Jim, get his website so we can all contribute!

AJM: Yeah. I will follow up on that. I just want to interject here – this is Jim, Mr. Hunter, you know me….

DH: Just faintly (laughing). He’s the only guy that calls me up when I’m in a tree stand.

ALL: (laugh)

LD: Did he scare the deer away?

DH: I got a big buck coming down the trail (laughing). Actually, Jim did call me. I was stalking elk in Colorado, and they were bugling, and I was moving in on them, and then *RING*. It’s Jim. And he wants to chat.

Go ahead Jim.

ALL: (laughing)

AJM: I wanted also to mention, since the last time I posted our interview, someone said “well, what’s Hunter doing, he’s not doing anything. Tell him to get out in the arena.” And so I responded to that by saying well, to my knowledge he did a fundraiser for Vaughn Ward up in Idaho, and he also did one with Jesse Kelly down in Arizona. Two very promising vets….

DH: Hey, I also gave at the office. I donated a kid. (laughing) I got my own candidate out there.

AJM: That’s right. And that apple did not fall far from the tree, as I keep telling everyone.

DH: With any luck, I’m going to get an appointment with him in the next couple of weeks.

ALL: (laughing)

DH: Last time I introduced Duncan – you know my other son Sam he’s in a Stryker unit over in Iraq right now - that’s my son ‘special’. Sam is ‘favorite’. He’s an Army guy, he joined the Army like his dad. But Duncan’s doing a great job. He just came back from Afghanistan incidentally, he’s on the Armed Services Committee, and the area he’s working – which is crucial for us – is roadside bombs. And, you know we developed a program in Iraq where we swept the roads with aerial surveillance. We brought in gunships to hit these guys as they were putting these bombs in place. It takes a while to set up a roadside bomb and we bring them in and get them. We literally took out thousands of roadside bombers. It was devastatingly successful. And we haven’t replicated that capability in Afghanistan, which makes absolutely no sense!

It’s an operational thing and Duncan’s campaign is to take out the roadside bombers. So he’s hammering the Marines, his old corps, to move faster, and also he’s trying to get the Pentagon and Generals to start moving in that direction.

AJM: Yeah, that sounds an awful like Duncan Hunter, D1, about 2 or 3 years ago, or more like 3 or 4 years ago.

DH: You know, he was on Fox News, and the guy that was doing the interview had expected me. He hadn’t been keeping up with the times. He says “you’re not Duncan Hunter”. So Duncan looked the camera in the eye and said “oh yes I am”. He said “my secret is Botox and exercise”. (laughs)

ALL: (laughing loudly)

AJM: Oh sh*t! (laughing)

DH: So listen, what’s happening with you guys?

LD: May I interject something really quick.

DH: Go ahead.

LD: Congressman Hunter, what you were just talking about, the roadside bombs and all. I was actually able to view those, from the guys at Walter Reed. On their laptops they were showing me, just what you said, they were watching them from the air. They said “now watch, now watch”. You see them putting the bombs, then CREEEEE-BOOM. Gone. And we would laugh. It was great. Great job.

DH: We were very effective. We really hammered them. Just took out thousands of them. And the thing about killing a roadside bomber is you are not putting a two thousand pound bomb into a house that may or may not have civilians in it. You are hitting the guys who are trying to kill your troops. There is no collateral damage and they are in the act of war right there. And if you don’t hit them, later on they detonate these things remotely. The next day, if you are a terrorist, you are standing in a fruit market 200 yards from the road waiting for the Marine convoy to come down the road and line up with the street lamp you put the bomb under, then you simply detonate it with the clicker in your pocket. And you probably don’t even carry a weapon. So at that point you can’t get them (the terrorists). The time to get them is when they are putting these things in, and that is what we are trying to impress upon the command in Afghanistan. So that’s the campaign we’ve got going right now.

AJM: And the Commander in Chief.

LD: We don’t have one of those…..

AJM: That leads me to my first question. I was going to start off with Fort Hood, but I’m going to start off with Afghanistan

Afghanistan as you know, Obama in March told us in a very eloquent speech, his brand new strategy with his brand new commander and all this stuff, and during the campaign he was promising that Afghanistan would be priority number one. Come to find out that General McChrystal’s report has been sitting on his desk, and Bob Gates’ desk, since August. And Obama is doing nothing but dithering. Just the day before yesterday, CBS came out and said “Obama has approved the 40,000 extra troops”. Then today, they put out a correction, he has not approved it. Spokesman Gibbs, giblets is what I call him, said that Obama is still considering the FOUR options and will make a decision within WEEKS! That was from today. Do you have anything you’d like to impress upon the ‘commander in chief’?

DH: Here is the challenge to President Obama. He has talked at length about how effective he would be in bringing the American allies to the cause. And one of his chief criticisms of the President, President Bush, was that he felt President Bush went to war without the allies. He now has the NATO countries, some 26 nations, and a few non-NATO countries in Afghanistan. And they agree in principle that the war in Afghanistan is important, and that it’s important that we win.

So you now have the Germans, who are under admonishment from their own Bundestag not to leave the fort at night, to prevent casualties. You have the French refusing to go into the areas where they actually have combat.

GW: Shocker.

DH: So you have the allies with just a few exceptions, the Brits one of them….

AJM: The Canadians…

DH: just a few, yeah the Canadians have been in some combat areas, although we’ve now displaced the Canadians in Helmand Province which is one of the places where there is a lot of action. I call that the “NATO shift”. If you made a mistake and you are in NATO, and you actually have to go to war, and there is an American nearby that can displace you, you quickly rotate out and get the Americans to rotate in. And so you’ve got a NATO membership which spends more time enjoying catering and uniform fittings than they do employing to the battlefield. And so this should be a job for the President.

I think we have to concede that President Bush utilized his secretaries of defense to carry this message, this argument that NATO should be doing more. Don Rumsfeld carried it. Remember he had some pithy comments about ‘old europe’ not being as supportive as ‘new europe’ was. You had Secretary Gates making tough comments about the fact that only Americans right now were fighting and dying in Afghanistan and there was no burden sharing. So now the secretaries, they’ve had their run at the European stonewall and they haven’t succeeded in getting the Europeans onto the battlefield.

And the guy who argued that he would be the man to persuade European leaders to join up in the war against terrorists - that is President Obama - should now put his money where his mouth is! He should now prove up. And he should, with head of state to head of state communications, one by one, persuade the NATO allies to actually come to the battlefield and participate in the war. That’s the real determinative of leadership, the real addition of leadership. And he has not done that. That is what he should be doing right now.

AJM: He’s too busy backslapping with Hugo Chavez.

DH: Yeah, I don’t think Mr. Chavez is going to show up on that front. But anyway, that is a legitimate role for a President. And at this point it’s clear that only the President is going to be able to move this boulder, of actually pulling NATO back into the reality that they are supposed to be a security organization, not a catering club.

AJM: Well what do you think about this idea, or this fact that Obama came out in March of this year, several months after taking office, and proclaimed that he had a brand new working strategy for Afghanistan, when he didn’t have anything of the frickin sort?

DH: Well, it’s time for him to man up. We haven’t seen the prove up. If he can persuade the NATO allies, for example, to get in and share this combat burden, then I’ll be the first person to congratulate him. But he has not done that.

LD: He’s insulted most of them hasn’t he? The French, the English, the Germans…

DH: (laughs) According the ‘world press’, he’s still immensely popular with the electorate of those countries. In fact he may well be, because their press, their national press is very, very liberal. I think they embraced anyone who was against George Bush and George Bush’s policies. The argument that is made by the European allies, by the heads of state, is that their hands are tied, that their people are very much against their soldiers going into combat. They are able to drag their troops to the theatre; they just can’t get them to leave the fort without upsetting their people. Obama, according to these world polls, is supposedly quite popular with their people. So there is no reason for a French leader or a German leader, there is no excuse for them to not now participate in this burden sharing of actually going out on the field of combat and handling some of these difficult missions.

That’s the thing he ought to be doing right now, and that’s essentially what he promised he would do. And he hasn’t come through at all.

AJM: Yeah, that’s an understatement. Let me tie that into the general War on Terror, where we saw a very bleak example of that transpire at Fort Hood Texas, not too far from Russell. And that is the incident – what day was that – Thursday, with 14 people dead, 13 people dead and 30 something wounded. Come to find out, Congressman, that even in the liberal press and the conservative press they are finding that the FBI, the military intelligence, everybody and their brother to a look at this son of a bitch, and saw that he was communicating with Al Qaeda types, and they did nothing. I’d like your commentary on what the heck is wrong with this politically correct attitude that we’re not going to yank people out like this, that have proven themselves beyond a shadow of a doubt to be of questionable motives.

DH: Yeah, all I’ve got is what I’ve read in the newspapers, so I’m always careful. You’ve got to see precisely what facts were in front of the FBI, in front of our military intel guys. I know that he went to this church, this mosque, that was then in Northern Virginia, as was reported in the paper. It was led by this extremist cleric, who as I understand, has issued a statement saying he did the right thing in killing those Americans. I understand this is also the same mosque where some of the 911 highjackers went to.

I don’t know what was exactly in front of the FBI at the time. But if there is fault and blame in this thing, we have to follow this thing through to the end! And ensure that when you see those signs, that you IMMEDIATELY take action. This isn’t a game we’re playing. And let’s hold people ACCOUNTABLE for what they did.

I don’t know all the facts, but what I thought about when I saw this, it brought to mind a couple things. One is, remember just before we went into Iraq, as I recall there was a Sergeant who killed two officers. He threw a grenade into the tent. A muslim Sergeant. And I think that is something we have to look at. This guy’s not a raving maniac. He is a guy that is told by his preachers, so to speak, “attaboy, you did the right thing; you did what was morally right”. So he felt that was his moral compass, to kill Americans, that is. So this is a very dangerous element, if you have a person in a military organization who feels it’s his moral duty to kill his fellow soldiers; that is something where you HAVE to take tough action.

That’s not an attitude of resentment; it’s not an attitude of slight instability. In fact, it’s exactly the same position – when I saw what this guy did – he had the same mental state, the same purpose, as the muslim guys that drove the planes into our buildings.

DF: Exactly.

DH: That’s what I know so far.

AJM: Let me inform you one other piece of information on this. There’s been a ton of stuff coming out, and I know you’ve been busy today. But one of the things that Michelle Malkin has put up, along with the Washington Post as well, is that he (Hasan) gave a presentation, 2 years ago, as he was just about to get his degree in psychiatric medicine, or psychiatry, or whatever it is. But all the students that were in the military taking these courses had to make presentations. While most of the guys got up and talked about a certain drug use, or combat stress, things they’ve learned or researched, this guy got up and gave a jihadist speech, going so far to say that the infidels throats must be cut. This was in front of a bunch of other officers and military doctors, etc, etc., two years ago. And they didn’t drum this SOB out?!

DH: Have you seen the speech, word for word?

AJM: I have not seen it word for word, but I’ve seen slides or snippets of it that the Washington Post reported.

DH: Did they record it?

AJM: I believe it is recorded.

DH: Or transcribed. Well, I haven’t seen it. But it makes my point. This wasn’t a guy who suddenly lost his stability and went berserk. This was a person whose purpose, driven by what he saw as his moral compass, was to kill Americans. What you just told me was that purpose was actually articulated some months earlier. So it’s not something that happened two hours before he went on a rampage. So the inaction of his colleagues is just bizarre.

And one other thing I think is remarkable. Let’s just say he didn’t do anything; circumstances were such that he didn’t take the action that led to all of this. The question you’d ask is – this is a guy who is supposed to be helping to stabilize people and to reassure people about their moral purpose in life, that they are right in fighting for their country, and in laying down their lives for the country? These returning GIs being counseled that their cause is morally wrong? And that the jihadists are right? How can that possibly help their mental state? That’s a question we should ask. The type of question from a psychiatric point of view. Why is THAT good for our any of our GIs?

The answer is just that they put a bunch of psychiatrists in a big forum and stir them like scrambled eggs, then apply them to our soldiers. There is no benefit coming out of these so-called ‘counseling’ sessions.

They ought to be listening to guys like Jim Mattis, General Jim Mattis of the First Marine Division who said “when you kill these jihadists who are trying to kill our people, these Al Qaeda, you are doing the RIGHT thing!”

I'm reminded that General Kelly had to take one of his chaplains aside who was kind assuring all his Marines that they were all “victims” of the war. He had to pull this guy aside and he (Gen. Kelly) finished the session to the Marines.

AJM: A counseling session?

DH: It wasn’t a counseling session, it was an address to the Marines, and he had this nitwit chaplain who started going off on the “we are all victims” route, and Kelly jumped in and said “listen, you’re all great Americans. You are doing the right thing. Feel good about what you are doing.”

If these psychiatrists that are telling these guys that they are victims, that we are all victims, and beyond that - they are wrong, that makes you wonder about this guys colleagues! What are they doing? Are they a bunch of potted plants?

AJM: Hey Congressman, Lynn has a follow-up on this. Lynn, why don’t you ask, or tell Congressman Hunter what you told me earlier.

LD: Congressman Hunter, I spent 4 years at Walter Reed. I was there at least one day, sometimes two or three days a week. Numerous times I over-nighted there…

DH: What were you doing, Lynn? When you were there all that time, what were you doing?

LD: I was just acting as a citizen that loves our heroes and wanted to make sure they were supported.

DH: OK, so you weren’t there as an employee of any kind, or service provider. You were coming in to see our wounded guys, give them some comfort and cheer. That’s great.

LD: Yes, for a couple of years when it got real bad in Iraq, I was making “Welcome Care” baskets. When they would come in, we’d give them this basket, because you know, their clothes are cut off of them on the battlefield; they go to Germany to stabilize before they are flown in…

DH: Yeah, I know all about that. Only the US Army could fine you for leaving your equipment when you’re carried off in a stretcher. I sometimes wonder if they do these things for humorous reasons. Only Uncle Sam could do this to you.

ALL: (laughing)

LD: Yes, I’ve known hundreds and hundreds of these guys. If you read the Citizens Report on Iraq, I’m the one who wrote what the troops and the families had to say. I interviewed our troops, and I was getting emails from the battlefield, as well as from the wounded. Being there as often as I was, I wanted to say that not to elevate myself in any way. Because to me, I could never possibly do enough for these men and women. But the reason I said all that was to let you know how terribly involved, how intimately involved, I was with them. And the big thing is, because I wasn’t a government employee, they trusted me. I was privy to a lot of information.

Now, various wounded Warriors at Walter Reed expressed shock and surprise when they saw a soldier wandering around the grounds of Walter Reed Army Medical Center in muslim garb. I don’t know if you’ve seen the pictures of Hasan in the long white gown and the headdress, the white cap thing.

AJM: This is the murderer guy….

LD: Yes, yes, yes.

DH: That is what he wore??

LD: Well, he didn’t always, Congressman Hunter. I think that that did not happen until later….I’ll be honest with you, I was in DC for Michele Bachaman’s call (Tea Party), in DC on Thursday and I got home at 4:30 AM and one of my soldiers called me at 8:30, just ranting about this. I’ve known this kid now since 05. He’s out now and everything, but he was severely wounded. He was just screaming and ranting “YOU KNOW HIM, YOU KNOW HIM”. And he started telling me that this Hasan actually ‘counseled’ this kid, because “they all have to be counseled”. And here they have this muslim guy. I don’t think in the beginning he wore this white gown, but was in uniform. But later on he started wandering the grounds. I even asked one of the employees at Walter Reed “who is that and what’s he doing here”. He said “he’s just visiting the soldiers”. I said “oh, Okay”. So one day I’m standing there with a group of soldiers, and quite frankly, they were like “WHAT?” and one said “what the ‘F’, are you kidding me?”

So my question is, do you really think Walter Reed is the best military hospital they could find for Hasan to do his internship, his residency, and his fellowship? He spent six years Walter Reed Army Medical Center! Did anyone in the upper echelon give ANY consideration to the effects that this might have on our battle fatigued and wounded warriors, when this is the premier hospital that brings in the worst of the worst?

DH: The answer to that is I don’t think they do. This is an intuitive answer, not one that is based on absolute knowledge of what they do and what their standards are. But I think that this is such a vague science, and subject to so much interpretation, that when you have a person that’s got credentials as a psychiatrist, it’s like taking your car, a new car that’s got all the computer stuff in it, and you take it in for repair, and they have all the machines there. They could be chewing gum for the next ½ hour and you wouldn’t know if they were really affecting these complex systems in your car or not. So I think it is something that the fighting, the war fighting wing of the military kind of pushes away, or compartmentalizes – and says that’s all the squirrelly guys who come in and talk to you about your mental state. And I think most of the war fighters don’t have a high opinion of these psychiatric people, and possibly for very good cause. So these providers, they kind of left them alone. This is not something like going down to the rifle range, where you either hit the target or you don’t. It’s a very vague science, and one in which, I think, people can provide no value whatsoever and can still exist for years. Even then, and I understand that this guy even got some bad OERs – so apparently some people picked up on his appalling lack of value that he represented –

AJM: And he was proselytizing…

LD: Yes.

DH: Yes, that’s what you told me, and that may have led to some of his bad reports. It’s kind of like – the guy who used to work for me, was a great guy, Wendell Cutting, my chief of staff out here that died of cancer a couple of years ago. And he was at one time a superintendent of a school here in California. And he said that one year, he fired a teacher. And he said he thinks he was the ONLY superintendent in the entire state, that year, who successfully fired a teacher; and did not have them later re-instated. The teacher came back later, ran for the school board and was a burr in his saddle ever since.

My point is, there are certain government jobs you can be in, where you cannot be dynamited out of that job. And I think that being a psychiatrist in the military, is quite possibly one of those jobs. Maybe akin to being a professor, like this Ward Churchill idiot, in Colorado, where they can say the most outrageous things, and be protected by the politically correct bureaucrats.

*****************

(Here the transcript ends, due to malfunction, but the summary of the rest of our conversation follows below)

Congressman Hunter went on to state emphatically that people that show any tendencies like Nidal Hasan need to be yanked out of the military immediately. And it is more than obvious that jihadist speeches are grounds for more than just a dismissal. That this kind of thing creates a “toxic environment that cannot be tolerated”, period.

He stated that the “entire discipline of psychiatrists” in the military needs to be opened up and examined. And heads should roll for any dereliction of duty associated with the case of this terrorist in Foot Hood.

Hunter also stated quite bluntly that if the Nidal had been a Baptist, and used his position as a shrink to proselytize to our wounded troops, the ACLU and the politically correct bureaucrats would have had him identified and would have attempted to drum him out in a heartbeat.

Hunter mentioned the case where the Pentagon Bureaucrats had told Chaplains – yes, chaplains, not to preach in Jesus’ name, and also their decision to prohibit the reciting of the traditional Christian prayers during the folding of the flag ceremonies at military funerals. It was, in fact, Hunter himself who put on the brass knuckles while still in office and forced the bureaucrats to rescind this PC claptrap.

Russell then asked what we, as citizens, could do to counter the politically correct nonsense that seems to have permeated even into our military. Russell’s son is currently on active duty, so he was not simply speculating.

Hunter’s answer was twofold. First, it is the responsibility of the parent to raise their children right with the “right values and principles”. Hunter noted that the vast majority of our servicemen are upstanding and are willing to mock the politically correct stuff that is sent their way. Also, Hunter stated that we must have leaders that understand the importance of allowing our warriors to live by their principles and the heritage of our armed forces. And for the most part, Hunter says, the military is a great place for people to be able to live those principles, and that those principles are demonstrated time and again by the quality men and women now serving, “regardless of their station in life” when they joined.

To illustrate this, Hunter recounted a story told to him by General Tom Kelly, about an incident in Iraq. Two Marines were on duty together, in charge of guarding an outpost entryway out in the very dangerous Anbar Province. One was a poor black kid who grew up without a father, dirt poor, in a bad neighborhood. He joined the Marines to find a better life and to find self discipline. The other Marine on duty that night was a Princeton student, raised in a wealthy, well educated family, with the expectations and opportunities that he would go on to live well in the upper class society of America. He joined the Marine Corps after 9-11. While on duty that night, a truck loaded with explosives came barreling down the entry way, with no intention of stopping. The Iraqis who were on duty scattered and ran. These two warriors both got down with their weapons and began firing heavily at the rushing truck. They kept firing until it finally lurched to a stop, at which point it detonated. Both men were killed. Together. But they saved the lives of a multitude of other Marines and Iraqis who were stationed at the outpost. It is a poignant story about duty, honor, America and what it means to be Marine.

Hunter then pointed out that the warriors in the USMC look up to and greatly admire men like General Peter Pace, who had the courage to call homosexuality “immoral” in his testimony against the idea of ending the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy that the democrats are so eager to dismantle.

AJM reminded Hunter that while the slings and arrows of the democrats and leftwing media were being fired at Peter Pace, there was one rock ribbed republican who did not run and hide behind Nancy Pelosi’s skirt, but instead contributed a triumphant defense of General Pace and a scathing rebuttal to the leftists’ social experiments in an A-Section Op-ed in the USA Today, and that was Duncan Hunter himself.

In summation, Hunter said to lead by example, congratulate our warriors who do so day in and day out, and support the politicians that do not abide by cowardly political correct platitudes, but rather are proud of America and our heritage.

Finally, Hunter encouraged us all to spread the word about Gunnery Sergeant Nick Popaditch’s campaign to take back the border county of California from the very liberal, and very beatable Bob Filner! This was a prime example how we could directly support a return to the “values and principles” that will keep America great!

More to come in the weeks ahead.
Thanks again to Pissant at Free Republic.com for inviting me to participate and providing the transcript.
-red

Duncan Hunter, America Needs You Now Sir.

"You know the thing I think that makes us different from other people around the world, is I think Americans still have a strong streak of independence. And an even stronger streak of independence from government. And attempts to control things by government, tend to nettle Americans, and to draw resistance. And the liberals and democrats continue to think that the desire for security, and for comfort, and for assurance – all the things that you’re supposed to get from a socialistic system, that those factors are going to outweigh those streaks of independence and self reliance. And I think what the Obama administration is going to discover is that the desire for “security and comfort” will certainly not outweigh this strong streak of independence that the American people possess." - Duncan Hunter 10/27/09

Read the complete interview thanks to Pissant
Special thanks to Russell Scott and J.A. Madison.
I stand ready to serve on a Hunter campaign to defeat socialism in America....
-red

The Communists Are Here...

Government takeover of the housing and home loan industry...
Government takeover of the auto industry...
Government takeover of the banking industry... wall street...
Government takeover of student loans...
Government takeover of medicine and healthcare... talk radio,...
The news media didn't need taking over since they were already in the tank and next the food industry, small business and finally...
government takeover of YOU.

So, hide your head in the sand or choose to be ignorant if you will, but the Democrat party is controlled by socialists, communists and fascists and it's time to fight back or lose our freedom forever. Don't expect to come crying later and get your freedom back.

Vote against socialism and communism in 2010 and 2012... vote against the continuation of the Democrat party communist takeover, it may be the LAST chance you get to vote for freedom. If you don't want to live in an America that looks like Venezuela or Iran or N Korea.... then wake up America. The communists are here.
-red

Left Not Interested In Brutal Murder Over Political Views?

Last Friday an abortion protester was brutally murdered by a pro-abortion domestic terrorist while exercising his constitutional right to protest the killing of innocent unborn children... (by carrying a sign), yet the state controlled mainstream news media is silent and (coincidentally) the Obama administration is silent about his murder which was admittedly politically motivated.

The Michigan Free Press reports:

Harlan Drake, 33, of Owosso, was arraigned this afternoon on two counts of first-degree murder, one count of using a gun in commission of a crime, and carrying a gun with the intent to commit a crime.

James Pouillon, 63, was shot multiple times at around 7:30 a.m. as he protested across from Owosso High School, police said. [...]

[Shiawassee county prosecutor Randy] Colbry said the grievances were not known in detail, but that the killing of Mr. Puillon was related to the latter’s anti-abortion protest. But he said, “The defendant was offended by the manner of Mr. Puillon’s message.”

From The Weekly Standard-

"When third-trimester abortionist George Tiller was murdered on Sunday, May 31, President Obama issued the following statement hours after news broke about the killing:

I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."

Isn't it interesting how the left was outraged by the killing of a murderer (Tiller the baby killer) claiming those who oppose abortion are potential domestic terrorists, but completely uninterested in the politically motivated murder of an innocent person exercising their right to mere free speech?

Smell the hypocrisy. Smell the rotting corpse of the Democrat party?
-Red

UPDATE: CBS NEWS Ignores the Killing of Pro-Life Activist While ABC and NBC Explain Away Brutal Murder, Look at "Flip Side"...

Katie Couric’s CBS Evening News on Friday omitted any mention of the murder of pro-life activist Jim Pouillon in Michigan, despite having discussed the murder of abortionist George Tiller on the June 1, June 2 and June 9 newscasts (and then referencing the killing as a recent “hate crime” in a June 10 report on the shooting at Washington, D.C.’s Holocaust Museum).

Both ABC’s World News and the NBC Nightly News, in contrast, offered full reports on the killing of Pouillon and a local businessman, but offered different explanations by saying "Harlan Drake, had grudges against his victims and another intended target but “none of them were specifically related to anti- or pro-abortion beliefs.

Not quite the same coverage or outrage that the abortionist Tiller got now was it?
Disgusting.
-red

Left Wondering If Radical Leftist Socialization of America Has Awakened The Silent Majority

I gotta laugh... (sorry), some on the left are beginning to wonder if the radical takeover of private companies and excessive out of control growth of government spending and extreme leftist policies being implemented on almost an hourly basis... (i.e. overreaching), by the rabid foaming at the mouth Obama administration which is totally controlled by admitted communists, radical leftist extremists, corrupt Chicago cronies and assorted other America haters appointed by the anointed one, is actually helping Republicans... ?... !

I can answer this with a quick reply.
Yes, and I told you so.

Wednesday Feb 11 2009- "Look for these foaming at the mouth Democrats to over reach, over spend, over legislate, over socialize and over step the boundaries Americans are willing to accept." -Red Stater

Bring on 2010 and 2012.

The Lessons From 9-11-2001

President Obama is commemorating the September 11th 2001 Muslim Jihadist attacks on America by using the date to promote education on swine flu and promote community service.

The lesson from 9-11 to those on the left is "never let a crisis go to waste" (even an 8 year old crisis) instead of the real lesson of that fateful horrible day.

So today was used as a marketing tool, a propaganda tool and a campaign tool by the Obama administration. The lesson they want us to learn is to think of 9-11 as a one-off event, to forget that we are still under attack, the lesson for us is to serve Obama, honor all things Obama.

But what is the real lesson to be remembered from the planned and coordinated attacks of Sept 11 2001 by Muslim Jihadists?

If you must ask, then you really are lost... so let me ask you this question.

If 3,000 innocent Americans were killed by a drunk driver... or a group of drunk drivers hellbent on destruction, then what would the lesson of that day be then?
Eliminate all drunk drivers of course... zero tolerance for drunk drivers, educate the public on drunk drivers, create a turn-in a drunk driver program, wipe out drinking and driving.

So, what should the real lesson from 8 years ago be?

Creating Jobs.... One at a time, You Can Do It Too !

Two months ago I was looking for work and not getting anywhere.... then I got tired of waiting for someone to hire me and fix the problem for me and so 4 weeks ago I started my own business.

I started with no money, no contacts, no product, no customers, nothing ...but an idea.
4 weeks later we have done well over $30,000 in gross sales, have employed 3 trucking companies full time keeping 5 semi's and drivers busy hauling up to two loads per day from Oklahoma to Colorado. Next week they will haul 4 semi loads for us with drivers that were previously sitting on the couch waiting for the phone to ring in trucks and trailers that were parked with nowhere to go. In one month we have spent about $10,000.00 with that trucking company.

My supplier in Oklahoma was almost out of business a month ago and now is hiring more workers, buying new equipment and adding space to his facility as we have spent around $15,000.00 so far with them and will spend another $15,0000 in the next two weeks.

My point is not to try and claim I am somehow smart or special... just ordinary, but if I can create my own "stimulus package" and create job(s), then you can do it.

I encourage each of you to find a niche market, do the research and talk to potential customers, find suppliers wanting to sell into your region or area or just needing some business, work out the logistics, make it happen and live the dream.

I highly recommend it over waiting for the government to solve your problems or waiting for the President to send you a check.

Van Jones the Phony "Green Jobs" Czar, Communist, Truther... Quitter.

Shocking NEWS... the same man who palled around with radical leftwing domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and who spent decades faithfully attending church where racist radical Reverend Jeremiah Wright preached hatred of all things white and all things American, who also helped create the criminal election fixing organization known as ACORN, who has virtually quoted Karl Marx during his campaign, the guy we were told was a centrist, a moderate... a man for all seasons, ...that guy, the one, the messiah, somehow "accidentally" let a self described communist and 911 'truther' slip through the non-existent "vetting process" and named him official "Czar" of "Green Jobs"*. (*Of course like all things Democrat, there is no such thing as a "green job" since in one way or another ALL jobs rely on fossil fuels in some capacity and will continue to do so for decades if not centuries to come)

Oh, I almost forgot... he's a quitter.

Students 'Asked' to Pledge Support For Dear Leader

Obamanation: Now the Obama administration and Hollywooders are recruiting grade school students to pledge allegiance to "serve" the "dear leader".

Flopping Aces has the full yet disgusting story of the indoctrination into communism of our future generation.

Can you just imagine the outcry if George W Bush had gone into the schools to promote his conservative agenda, garner support for gun ownership, explain the need to drill for oil or to gain support for the war in Iraq?

Not a word from the state-run news media about Obama doing it however.
-red

Obama's Job Approval At All-Time Low, Continues Down

Thanks to Flopping Aces for the image.

Democrats Considering Political Suicide Mission

Thanks to Curt at Flopping Aces...

"The talk in Washington is that Senate Democrats are preparing to push through health care reforms using parliamentary procedures that will allow a simple majority to prevail in their chamber, as it does in the House, instead of the 60 votes needed to overcome the filibuster that Senate Republicans are sure to mount.With the death of Senator Edward Kennedy, the Democrats do not have the votes just among their 57 members (and the two independents) to break a filibuster, and not all of these can be counted on to vote in lock step. If the Democrats want to enact health care reform this year, they appear to have little choice but to adopt a high-risk, go-it-alone, majority-rules strategy.We say this with considerable regret because a bipartisan compromise would be the surest way to achieve comprehensive reforms with broad public support. But the ideological split between the parties is too wide — and the animosities too deep — for that to be possible.In recent weeks, it has become inescapably clear that Republicans are unlikely to vote for substantial reform this year. Many seem bent on scuttling President Obama’s signature domestic issue no matter the cost. As Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, so infamously put it: “If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him."

As Curt at Flopping Aces so aptly put it.... "Bring it…."

The Lefts' Obsession With Phony Science

During a debate which developed in the comments section of another post (ROFLMAO of the Day) below, a fellow blogger asserted that because animals are 'gay', then human homosexuality is therefore just as natural as heterosexual behavior.

Luiz Sérgio Solimeo has written a well researched piece on The Animal Homosexual Myth.

"In its effort to present homosexuality as normal, the homosexual movement[1] turned to science in an attempt to prove three major premises:

1. Homosexuality is genetic or innate;
2. Homosexuality is irreversible;
3. Since animals engage in same-sex sexual behavior, homosexuality is natural.

Keenly aware of its inability to prove the first two premises,[2] the homosexual movement pins its hopes on the third, animal homosexuality.[3]
Animals Do It, So It's Natural, Right?

The reasoning behind the animal homosexuality theory can be summed up as follows:

- Homosexual behavior is observable in animals.
- Animal behavior is determined by their instincts.
- Nature requires animals to follow their instincts.
- Therefore, homosexuality is in accordance with animal nature.
- Since man is also animal, homosexuality must also be in accordance with human nature.

This line of reasoning is unsustainable. If seemingly "homosexual" acts among animals are in accordance with animal nature, then parental killing of offspring and intra-species devouring are also in accordance with animal nature. Bringing man into the equation complicates things further. Are we to conclude that filicide and cannibalism are according to human nature?

In opposition to this line of reasoning, this article sustains that:

1. There is no "homosexual instinct" in animals,
2. It is poor science to "read" human motivations and sentiments into animal behavior, and
3. Irrational animal behavior is not a yardstick to determine what is morally acceptable behavior for rational man."

The money quote:

Conclusion-
"In summary, the homosexual movement's attempt to establish that homosexuality is in accordance with human nature, by proving its animal homosexuality theory, is based more on mythological beliefs and erroneous philosophical tenets than on science."

Sounds a lot like the same phony "science" the left uses to sell us on global warming, stem cell research and abortion doesn't it?
That's because it is.
-red