Good Will Huntering

Newsweek’s got a good profile of young Duncan D. Hunter’s “was already up the hill from the getgo” struggle to succeed his father, Duncan “Have the Military Nuke the Wildfires” Hunter in the 52nd Congressional District. Yours truly has another of his truly pithy lines quoted.

As I’ve written about Presidential politics, legacy can be a wonderful thing. Who’d have thought that, two hundred thirty one years after our revolution against the inherited powers of monarchy, the land of the common man should become so enamored with dynasties. Yeah, there were the Adams, the Roosevelts and the Kennedys but there seem to be more sons/daughters/wives/husbands of current or former politicians coming into politics everyday. One can see the same trend from Hollywood to Wall Street, by the way. As the Economist Magazine pointed out in 2005, in the land of opportunity, social mobility is actually more static than in what the right sees as an increasingly socialist Europe.

Enter our own dynasty-building with Hunter & Son. Daddy Duncan apparently wants to keep the family business in the family and give Duncan the Younger his seat in Congress–and a lot of Dad’s buds in D.C. are ponying up hefty payola to make this a reality (including $2300 from Donny “You go to campaign with the money you’ve got—thanks to your Dad’s connections” Rumsfeld).

My only question is how are the other three Republicans currently in the primary race going to frame their campaign against Hunter the Younger? (And this race will be Them against Him.) Will Santee Councilman Brian Jones try to convince voters that serving in war may be hell but serving on the Santee City Council has been a close second? Can businessman Ken “The Pool” King convince the 52nd District’s socially conservative voters that there are no atheists in either foxholes or swimming pools? Can Bob “The Other Businessman in the Race” Watkins show patriotic voters in that scarlet red district that experience meeting payrolls and balancing budgets ranks in the wild west world of East County is as much of a credential as dodging hand grenades and IEDs in Afghanistan?

My bet is, noooooo, they can’t. So that will leave them character assassination—the political equivalent of an unfriendly Al Qaeda visit—to try and lay Hunter the Warrior Congressman low. Now, you might think it unseemly for go-Hawks Republicans to attack the reputation and qualifications of a rival politician with a record of military service far superior to their own. Then again, that didn’t stop Karl Rove from savaging certified war hero John McCain in South Carolina (on behalf of certified war non-hero George W.) back in 2000. Nor did it keep Republicans from smearing triple amputee Vietnam war veteran/hero Max Cleland for being soft on terrorists when they defeated him in 2002.

So look forward to the three conservative, pro defense, flag mom and apple-pie Republicans to blast young Hunter for being a carpetbagging, inexperienced, undeserving neophyte trying to ride to office on his Daddy’s coattails (albeit, admittedly, in battle-stained combat boots.)

And, whomever the Republicans nominate for the 52nd, expect that candidate to blast the lone Democrat in the race, retired Navy Seal commander Mike Lumpkin, as an Osama-loving, America-hating, socialist Democrat intent on destroying the nation.

It’s all in the name of serving the public will, afterall.


3 Responses to “Good Will Huntering”

  1. Firecliff Says:

    Yeah, the reps are pretty pathetic. More of the same from the Hunter legacy is unacceptable. Lumpkin, with a masters in national security. He’s got my vote.

  2. John Says:

    “to blast young Hunter for being a carpetbagging, inexperienced, undeserving neophyte trying to ride to office on his Daddy’s coattails”

    seems to me if they do so they’ll just be calling it like it is.

    As for Lumpkin, well if you poll a good swath of the Democrats who lean left of the party middle (throwing out the furthest left 10%, because, well, you can) they will tell you that the military is chock full of patriotic leftists who devour the works of Chomsky in their off hours and decide whether orders are lawful or not, detest George “Shrub” Bush and think supporting the troops means bringing them back as fast as possible to spend their whole lives being told they are losers and the limb they lost was for a mistake. (run on sentances will be commendable in the distant future. Ahem)
    The point is I doubt Lumpkin is a “real” Democrat any more than I am a “real” Republican, at least compared to the direction its more voiciferous members are headed. If he was he wasn’t in the same Navy I was in. ( I was a tech in VF-21 on the Coral Sea at the time Duke C. was Ops officer in 154, our sister squadron. He was the only “O” who spoke to us as humans.)
    Moreover military service hardly qualifies anyone to represent a congressional district in DC, though it’s a huge plus as qualifier for selection to Armed Services, Select Intel and related collateral duties. I hope the voters pick their candidate on issues and the integrity required for the position.

  3. Tyree Scheuers Says:

    I do not normally comment on peoples websites however I had to say thankyou for such a great read.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: