Friday, March 23, 2007
|
|
Why Fred Thompson Should Run
|
|
Posted by:
Mary Katharine Ham at
1:04 PM
|
|
Mona Charen hits all the usual reasons in her column today. The social squishiness of Rudy, the general distaste for McCain among conservatives, and the Tsongas-voting tendencies of Romney. So. What about that
likable fellow from Tennessee? Thompson is not "just an actor" (though
they said that about Reagan, and he turned out OK). He began his
professional life as an assistant U.S. attorney, worked as Sen. Howard
Baker's campaign manager and did a stint as co-chief counsel to the
Senate Watergate Committee. It was he who asked the innocuous-sounding
but momentous question of Alexander Butterfield: "Were you aware of the
existence of any listening devices in the Oval Office of the
president?"
After leaving Washington, he continued to practice law and
slipped into acting as easily as a wagon rolls downhill. They were
making a film about his legal exploits and couldn't find anyone who
could do Fred Thompson as well as he did himself. His voting record is solidly conservative. He is articulate,
self-made (his father was a car salesman), highly intelligent, and
exudes calm authority. His star power offers him an opening with
independent voters that other candidates can only dream of, while his
solid conservative credentials will excite the Republican base.
But there are better reasons to support Fred! (as Allah has dubbed him, if I'm not mistaken). Namely, the best campaign poster, evuh. You gotta click through for that because I didn't want to steal it and the traffic. Trust me. It's worth it. And, while we're Fred!-fixing, how 'bout the man from Tennessee on Iraq and attorneys. And, defending Gore! Gasp!
|
|
|
|
|
The "cranky old white" man demographic is (thankfully) dying off, so as a lifelong Democrat I support "FRED! 2008." |
|
Of course, if you want to be truthful, we'd have to say Fred is a flip flopper, just like everyone is accusing Romney of being a flip flopper.
It seems Fred didn't always come out on the side of life. Interesting.
|
|
|
So far he sounds like a great candidate. Exactly what America's conservatives need... a solidly CONSERVATIVE candidate. Read this BCRA-Amnesty McCain, Mitt wishy washy, and close but no cigar Gulliani. |
|
I think the hype over Fred will prove ill begotten. People are just looking so hard for the "perfect conservative" to step in. I doubt that he will prove to be that.
Some have already questioned his conservative credentials. See, for example http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/03/12/87865.aspx
People have been dreaming about this perfect conservative. It does not exist. We have some great canidates in our midst already. I welcome Fred into the group, but in the end, when the light starts to shine on him, I doubt he will be any different or weill be this mystical person everbody is looking for.
|
|
...or a Brownback or any of that ilk get nominated, there is "no chance" for the GOP in 08. Why? BECAUSE TEXAS WILL GO BLUE IN 08:
http://streetlevel.townhall.com/g/40db1d93-d21a-468d-be6a-4a6abca758d2
Fred Thompson might reverse that trend if he runs and if he keeps talking tough regarding the illegal issue/Mexican gov't. I do not believe that many are aware that Texas is now a battleground state. (see above link) With 34 ELECTORAL VOTES (2nd only to CA - NY being 3rd) the GOP doesn't have a chance w/out TX. CA and NY already being Blue.
So you GOP'ers in Northern states (and your legislators), removed and isolated from the herendous problems caused by the wide open southern border, had better think about that when these issues, regarding the illegal problem, come up. That is unless you're content Hillary and/or Obama in power over the next 8 years. DD |
|
What has he managed? Do you really want someone who has been a lawyer a senator and an actor? Has he ever handled a hot dog stand? No? Then I don't want him as president.
My father has had more management experience than he has but he's a Canadian so he can't run.
|
|
|
good point. That is why we don't want Senators running in the first place. They are politicians, not managers. We need an executive, someone competent to execute the laws, something we seem to be lacking unfortunately. |
|
...are Main Stream Media darlings because they are ALL SURE LOSERS in a general election. If the Dems & their Allies in the MSM learned anything from the mid-terms it was this;
Conservatives WILL NOT vote for a candidate just because he has an (R) attached to his name. The Dems took control of both houses more because conservative voters were unwilling to vote for candidates that did not represent the values of the voters themselves.
We, after all, are NOT DEMOCRAT VOTERS who will not only vote for pedophile congressman (Gerry Studds D - Massachusetts), homosexuals (Barney Frank D - Massachusetts), Ted Kennedy who is responsible for ending a young woman's life (& not facing charges for it) also a MA Democrat, BUT they CELEBRATE these people...sheesh!
So, the game plan for the MSM is to push a candidate that they can hammer away at for all of their shortcomings (and the Big 3 ALL have excessive baggage) to make the Republican base stay home in '08...
We are smarter than they are... Don't be taken in! When told by Bloggers, Posters, media-types that the candidate of "OUR CHOICE" has this, that, or the other thing in his background, do not panic. In most cases it will be false or at the very least exaggerated beyond recognition of what the true issue really is.
Support Fred Thompson
For President '08
|
|
|
Quebec will be having an election soon. Keep an eye on it. If the Separatist party wins it could be a wake up call about the immigration issue. |
|
Bytheocean
you tell us to "get real" then proceed to tell us Fred Thompson is not Presidential material because he hasn't 'run anything'...
First > You seem to know a lot about Canada and, I understand that could be simply because your father is a Canadian but I gotta ask... Are you a US citizen and registered voter?
If so, what party do you usually vote for?
I'm just being curious because you sound like a Rudy type of voter. You know, a RINO.
BTW is it still illegal to post English language signs on storefronts and businesses in Quebec?
Support Fred Thompson
For President 2008
Visit http://draftfredthompson.com/index.php
Add Your Name To The Petition
Become Part Of The Growing Number Of Fred's Backers
|
|
I am a Canadian who moved to the US and became a citizen and I am an independent. I certainly am not a democrat and there are some things I agree with the republicans and other things not. It just seems if someone is going to run a country of 300 million people and possibly the world, they should have some experience running something successfully. I do have conservative friends who want Fred Thompson to run.
I am leaning towards Mitt. In California we can vote in the primary of our choice.
And yes. One cannot post English signs such as "Sale" or "for Sale" in Quebec and stop signs are in French, the only place in the world where that is true.
|
|
Nice to talk to you. If you would perMIT a Massachusetts resident and one time vote for Mitt Romney tell you a few things about my former governor that the media just seems to be glossing over...
First of all, let me guarentee you (and any other Mitt Romney supporters reading this) the MSM that loves him now will hammer away at Mitt Romney if he gets the nod as the party standard bearer and, there won't be a thing we can counter with because it will all be true. Romney would be called "Another Massachusetts Flip-Flopper" (even if it costs Kerry his Senate seat) day in and day out in the media.
How do we recover from that?
Mitt has come to his (social) conservatism rather recently, look into it. As a resident of Massachusetts I can attest to this first hand. Granted this a TOTALLY controlled Dem state but former Governer Romney didn't do much in the social conservative vein until he decided it was politically advantageous for him to do so.
While running for Governor Mitt Romney was Pro-Choice which served him well in a bluer than blue state like this. But once he started running for president Mitt "flipped" knowing that for him to win the Republican nomination he would need the Pro-Life voters on his side. And at that point his only competition were Rudy and McCain, two other Pro-Choice candidates that he quickly outmanuevered.
**(McCain has since taken the pledge to "overturn Roe" something he knows he cannot do because even Justice Roberts has called it "settled law" meaning NEW legislation is needed to supercede Roe v Wade.)
He may have 'personally' been against "Gay Marriage" but Mitt made only a feeble attempt to get our legislature to follow the state's constitution and put it on the ballot for a vote by the people. When we did what was necessary to get the question on the ballot we only got Mitt's support at overturning the court imposed law (?) when he was almost out of town for good (pretty feeble wouldn't you say?).
He filed suit to force the legislature to perform their duties and to add a marriage protection amendment to the Massachusetts state constitution. They refused and, soon thereafter Mr Romney hit the campaign trail for good. And I said "Good riddance you opportunistic carpet-bagger!"
The irony of this is that the case was heard by the very same SJC that illegally mandated the gay marriage law from the bench in the first place but this time they refused to "get involved" in legislative matters. The statement realeased read something like, "the court would not feel comfortable interferring in state legislative affairs". Then they refused to order the legislature to perform their duties as the state constitution mandates.
Romney was also steadfast in his support for stem-cell research, using a personal story of (I think) an Aunt who suffered from a disease (Alzheimers ?) as the basis for his support. Then somewhere on the campaign trail he visited a lab and claimed (I paraphrase) 'seeing the 14 day old embryos' changed his mind. HUH?
Not once did he make an effort to ease the states restrictions on obtaining gun licenses, some of the toughest in the country. Yet now he is saying he has been an NRA member for a long time. Then why not help others become the same? That would be my question for him. I would be interested in hearing his answer.
On illegals over-running our state, taking our jobs, bleeding the system dry Mitt was silent for 3 years and 11 months of his 4 year term. Then he finally allowed the State Police to arrest & detain illegals stopped on roadways in Massachusetts for other violations.
Again, he was leaving the state for good in a month and, again needed the conservatives around the country to believe he was fighting illegal immigration for his entire term. He even has the Sheriff in AZ fooled.
If there was a feather or two in his cap, the first would have been his much ballyhooed healthcare for all Massachusetts residents without a tax increase. And a "rainy day surplus" that was as I recall supposed to be a couple of Billion dollars.
Unfortunately, the new Governor (a Dem who in his 1st month has been involved in scandal big and small at least once a week since he took office) says now that the rainy day surplus is NON-existent. Not that I trust his word but still, no surplus, no healthcare for all without a rather large tax increase if ever. The new governor also stopped the state police from enforcing the short-lived Romney law re: illegals. Like we didn't see THAT coming!
To add insult to injury, I place at least some of the blame on Mr. Romney for the state now having a Dem in charge. Mitt was out of the state last year over 200 days by some counts and DID NOTHING to help get his Lt.Gov. elected until said help was too little too late.
In fact, his help may have even worked against Lt. Gov. Kerry Healy by the time it came because so many had noticed Mitt was always off somewhere already campaigning for president and they were getting a little ticked off about it.
Mitt seemed oblivious to this which leads me to believe he only cares about Mitt's chances of moving into the People's House. Not a good enough reason to get my vote EVER AGAIN.
|
|
Are YOU a voter who wants a candidate that...
1) Is Strong on National Defense
2) Will Make Border Security a Priority
3) Will Appoint Strict Constructionist Judges
4) Is Pro-Life
5) Is Pro 2nd Amendment
6) Has Impeccable Conservative Credentials
7) Will Address the Entitlement Program Problem
8) Will Restore Quality to Education
9) Understands Foreign Policy
10) Is Against Gay Marriage
11) Is Environmentally Friendly But Not Eco-Nutz
12) Is A Man of Strength, and Character, Who Has the Backbone To Stand Tall Against The Liberal Agenda
This Man Is Fred Thompson.
(the items listed are in no particular order)
Support Fred Thompson
For President 2008
Visit http://draftfredthompson.com/index.php
Add Your Name To The Petition
Become Part Of The Growing Number Of Fred's Backers
|
|
Are YOU a voter who wants a candidate that...
1) Is Strong on National Defense
2) Will Make Border Security a Priority
3) Will Appoint Strict Constructionist Judges
4) Is Pro-Life
5) Is Pro 2nd Amendment
6) Has Impeccable Conservative Credentials
7) Will Address the Entitlement Program Problem
8) Will Restore Quality to Education
9) Understands Foreign Policy
10) Is Against Gay Marriage
11) Is Environmentally Friendly But Not Eco-Nutz
12) Is A Man of Strength, and Character, Who Has the Backbone To Stand Tall Against The Liberal Agenda
This Man Is Fred Thompson.
(the items listed are in no particular order)
Support Fred Thompson
For President 2008
Visit http://draftfredthompson.com/index.php
Add Your Name To The Petition
Become Part Of The Growing Number Of Fred's Backers
|
|
He did speak out against the ACLU and I don't think a leader ever has that I can remember.
It is so difficult to post to townhall.
|
|
|
Romney spoke out against the ACLU. |
|
I don't know if you have noticed, but Congressman Ron Paul, and Senator Tom Tancredo have been really big on doing the right thing (no amnesty)re: illegals. I like everything else they care about.
http://www.house.gov/paul/bio.shtml =Ron Paul
http://www.teamtancredo.com/= Tom Tancredo
And they do not support the secrecy of the N.A.U.
http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/
You will not hear all the garbage as the others are giving us. They will straight talk about the important issues we want to know about.
Check them out, and keep your eye on them. I think you will like what you hear. I think I may vote for them as a team. Unless something better comes along, and I don't mean another actor. I haven't been able to find info on Fred Thompsons issues. |
|
|
It's true Tancredo is good. The way the media talks about him one feels like the loony right to vote for him. |
|
|
|