Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Saturday, September 08, 2007
Jonah Goldberg :: Townhall.com Columnist
Wrapping my head around Fred
by Jonah Goldberg
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Well, Fred Dalton Thompson finally made it official, on the "Tonight Show" of all places: He's running for president. Though so far it's been more like strolling for president.

I like Thompson, but I've been pretty much immune to his cult of personality. It's amazing: Just say "I don't get it" about the man, and some Thompson fans will react like you disputed the wholesomeness of their mother's recreational habits.

I still don't really get the hoopla over the guy, but now that he's officially in the race, I'm giving it a try.

Until recently, pundits - including yours truly - chalked up Thompson's successful non-candidacy to Republicans' dissatisfaction with their choices. Thompson, a folksy actor with considerable communication skill - some say he's "Reaganesque" - was seen as the GOP's white knight, even its savior.

One problem is that Thompson took a really long time getting into the race, and white knights and saviors usually don't spend endless months lollygagging on the shady side of their "testing the waters" committee. Sir Lancelot didn't wait for just the right weather, after all. Thompson's critics point to this as Exhibit A in the case that Thompson is "lazy."

Thompson's response to the criticism is that he's in second place without raising tens or hundreds of millions of dollars as the experts said he had to. So what do they know? And, as he told Jay Leno, "I don't think people are going to say, ŒYou know, that guy would make a very good president, but he just didn't get in soon enough.'"

It's a good line and a good point, but it leaves out an important consideration. Politics is about seizing your moment. By taking this long, Thompson's Hamlet act may have cooled the ardor among his strongest supporters (and royally ticked off New Hampshire Republicans). He may be able to win over the uncommitted, but he also might have cost himself those he had at "hello" by saying "maybe" for so long. True believers are prized commodities in politics, and once their passions cool, they lose most of their value. Only time will tell if he's hurt himself.

The question for his competitors is, can they hurt him? Which brings us back to this laziness charge. The notion that Thompson doesn't have the "fire in the belly" to run for president has been bandied about Washington for a long time. But is it really a character flaw to think twice about jumping into the primary mosh pit earlier than necessary?

Mitt Romney, who's been running since dinosaurs ruled the Earth, thinks so, though he is more threatened by Thompson than his better-known rivals are. In response, Romney is running ads touting his "energy" and is whispering through surrogates that Thompson's lethargy is his Achilles' heel.

I'm not so sure. The laziness charge was always an inside-baseball criticism among politicos. Thompson doesn't have a lazy man's resume. Moreover, he can easily rebut the charge by simply reminding primary voters "that's what they said about Reagan."

And, like Reagan, Thompson can use his personality to his advantage. His charm stems from his persona as the anti-candidate. Like his Arthur Branch character on NBC's sagging "Law and Order," Thompson's appeal is that he doesn't say 10 words when eight will do (as opposed to, say, Sen. Joe Biden, who says 38,000 words when eight will do).

Romney wants to bring the slide rules and PowerPoint projectors of Wall Street to the White House. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani wants to re-create his whirlwind transformation of the "ungovernable city" on a national stage. And John McCain, at least rhetorically, promises to bring Teddy Rooseveltian vigor to the White House.

Meanwhile Thompson seems content to sit on his porch whittling a piece of wood with his pocketknife while offering pearls of wisdom out of an old Bartles & Jaymes commercial. It's all a bit hokey and canned, to be sure. But if Thompson's back-to-basics rhetoric proves to be more than schmaltz, it could be very popular with conservatives.

Activism and energy in the Oval Office have not always been conservative priorities. Applying the best practices of the private sector to government, as Romney wants to do, is certainly one kind of reform. But trimming the responsibilities of government to a few important and constitutional functions would also constitute real reform. Right now, the only bandwagon for a message even remotely like that is the Ron Paul campaign, and unfortunately, that bandwagon has no brakes. It long ago barreled past conservatism to swampy territory outside the borders of common sense.

Thompson could be different. While all the other candidates have a "can-do" personality, Thompson has a "won't-do" personality. And that's something many of us think has long been missing from the White House.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Jonah Goldberg's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
excuse me
on s/b one

Robert
President Bush is on of the few people who actually understands the importance if the Islamic threat in Washington DC. Has the war been conducted to an exacting time table? The short answer is no, no war ever has. I believe MSM is so biased & anti- administration, they completely distort the war information in a negative way. Could the war have been handled better; of course! but that's the advantage of hind sight ,always 20/20.

I disagree
I don't consider Iraq to be handled incompetently. It might actually be the one thing that Bush has done right. I do consider the reporting of what's happening in Iraq to be handled incompetently. Under the guise of objectivity the reporters there have, indirectly, chosen sides. What we need, when our troops are in danger, is some good old fashioned pro-American propaganda. What we get instead is "another Viet Nam" even though the numbers don't quite add up. Re. Gore. he seems like a nice enough fellow but I'm pretty sure he's delusional.

I'm reminded of........
the article that the social liberal, Jonah Goldberg, wrote entitled "Gays Win!!!". It stands to reason why the LBGT line and staff of the RNC and RSCC have foisted upon the secular conservative base of the Republican Party only LGBT Republican candidates for the 2008 POTUS nomination. It's readily apparent after reviewing the political and medical history of the APA since the revision of the ALIMPC in 1955. Fred Thompson is not the one if your concern is protecting children from abusive familial environments regardless of the socioeconomic status of the caretakers. Fred is your man if one has no problem engaging in unethical, if not antisocial behavior by knowingly promoting borderline caretaker environments for children. Now is not the time to be supporting the antisocial behavior of the Rockefeller = LGBT Republicans by supporting the fraudulent science emanating from the Kinsey Institute. I recognize that a Republican ticket consisting of two social liberals will not capture the White House in 2008. I'm still waiting for a legitimate conservative candidate for the 2008 Republican nomination.

Fred Thompson
I, for one, have not paid too much attention to the candidates this summer. Give me a break. It is another year before we vote. Do we have to listen to all this for two years. One year is enough for me to decide who I think is the right person to be president. Besides, the majority of the candidates have other responsibilities and should be attending to business, not out stumping for votes.

Robert: Think OBL will be intimidated by
the dulcet tones of the Shrillster?

HA!

The Islamies will be eager to silence her and shove her into a burka, making her stay at home unless accompanied by the Billster.

Think Billary will schlep Schrillary every where he goes?

NOT!

I see your point
Anne, I went to the link you gave and I'm not surprised that the liberal Republicans back then were just as cowardly as they are today.
I was barely a teenager in 1964 when Goldwater ran so I really didn't pay attention to him, but my father knew that Goldwater would have made short work of the ChiComs and their antics in Vietnam and that's why he supported him.
But you're right, Goldwater would have crushed RonnieBoy like the bug he is, especially if he could hear RP comparing HIMSELF to B.G.

CharlieS: Sorry, too much to hope for.

But, we should just be happy that they've given us a break, at least for today on this thread.


You've got that right
I'm really surprised that they haven't been overrunning this thread with their RonniePaul messages like they have on so many other threads.
Do we dare hope that they've finally learned some manners?

CharlieS: Thanks for the report...

Believe me, I'll take your word for it. The last thing I want to do is be counted as yet another hit on the site, which of course, we know will somehow be manipulated and used as an argument about how MANY people are in favor of ronniepaul.

And, just for the record, all their talk about how "Goldwater-ish" ronniepaul is, get this...

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/05/29/goldwater.obit/
"If I had inherited the mess that Johnson got into, I would have said to North Vietnam, by dropping leaflets out of B-52s, 'You quit the war in three days or the next time these babies come over there going to drop some big bombs on you.' And I'd make a swamp out of North Vietnam ... I'd rather kill a hell of a lot of North Vietnamese than one American and we've lost enough of them," Goldwater said.

I was a real Goldwater fan in HS and college, so their rhetoric didn't seem to ring true. Goldwater would have stomped ronniepaul like a bug!

What twits the paulists are!!!


The latest RonPaulettes trick
They have gone to the Tributes to Ronald Reagan pages of You Tube and posted a video showing how Reagan once said some good things about Ron Paul.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyXW1hb-JQg&mode=related&search=

I watched the video and then left a comment that Reagan would never say anything good about Paul if he could hear some of the whacked out things Paul has been saying lately.

Bye for Now
Have to leave for now my granddaughter has a ball game, will check in when I return.

No question about it
Giuliani was good at handling the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks, and he did a great job of cleaning up the crime and corruption in NYC. Too bad he was followed by a loser like Bloomberg who is working hard to restore NYC to the top of the corruptly governed cities list.

Some say that he is the only one that can beat the Hildabeast. I beg to differ.
I think, no, I know, that Fred Thompson would beat her and he will be a far better president than Giuliani ever could hope to be.
Fred Thompson is perhaps the closest thing to Ronald Reagan that this country is ever likely to see again, at least for the forseeable future.

Anne
I agree. Great big fines an especially jail time for the company officers. These people DO NOT WANT to be in jail period. One thing that frustrates me is the idea we must enact new laws to curb illegal migration & to secure our borders. What we need is enforcement of the current laws. Are there improvements to those laws needed; of course there are so lets fix the insufficient sections of these laws.

The Candidates
I think the best two candidates are
Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter. either should make an excellent President. At first Ron Paul's Libertarian concepts IE; small government size etc. sounded exciting however; he quickly went off the deep end.

Bart: Also agreed that we need to remove

the jobs and enforce the laws... fines AND jail time.

Some time ago Vic brought up an excellent point that there are some employers who would just continue to pay the fines because it would still be cheaper to pay fines and continue to employ illegal aliens.


Bart: Agreed!

Sorry. I was being facetious.

The fact is, Rudy is clearly a domestic liberal... always has been.

I don't think we could expect anything different from the (ex)mayor of a "sanctuary" city.

Savage99
I couldn't agree with you more on; the remove the jobs for them & they will quite coming here. I believe we need to put some teeth in the law for employers providing the jobs; hefty fines including jail time for repeat offenders. I'm surprised that the front runner Republican candidates just don't get it.

Anne
I believe this is just Rudy's way of saying he will do nothing about the illegal immigration issue.

Bart
We didn't import 'em and we don't have to deport 'em. They came because they saw a better deal here than where they were. If we start putting the few we catch behind barb wire, and fining/jailing those employers who provide jobs, the better deal will disappear and they will go somewhere else.
If it should happen they provide some positive function, we can expand the 8 alien worker programs on the books, enforcing infractions, of course. Illegal aliens do nothing for us that legal aliens can not do.

Anne
About this Yes

Bart: You really are confused,
aren't you?????



Anne & Savage99
I think you are correct in regards to Rudy G. He is to much like President Bush where conservatism is concerned; they both are quite liberal on most things.
Rudy states; illegal migration is not a felony, some one please tell me then what is it. Illegal entrants to this Country have broken our laws haven't they? How then do we deport people the government consider to be undesirable? I'm just old & easily confused.

Clinton
Robert argues that failed policies have made it a shoo-in for Hillary or Gore (who would've made a great president according to the self-proclaimed conservative Robert). I would say that the true failed policies of Bush are the ones that look most like the policies that liberals like Hillary or Obama would've created themselves (you know, tax-payer funded drug benefit, liberal immigration policies at war time). These are policies for which American tax payers will be forced to suffer in perpetuity.

thoughful_analyst
Interesting insight. I particularly liked the question "what about the ones who suffer?"

Well, my question in response would be: "What clause of the Constitution guarantees freedom from suffering?"

WOT
Robert stated earlier that to end the war on Terror all that has to be done is kill OBL and engage in police actions. This would be correct if 1) Al-Qaeda were the only terrorist organization that had a hard-on for the United States and 2) If Governments weren't supporting these organization.

The United State must continue to have a strong presence in the Middle East. A central location to engage in covert activity. I don't remember ever hearing a good assessment of US military actions from news organizations even through 2 of the most inspiring election the world has ever seen occured there. 4000 dead in a (five year?) campaign is unprecedented in the history of warfare. These are numbers no greater than can be found in urban areas of the United States. Yet to many people the action is a mismanaged failure. How is that possible? It's the most successful military campaign ever.

Liberalism
I've come to think of Robert as being the most brilliant proponent of conservative thinking on this site. His continual offering of staunch liberal views brings the rightness of conservatism into crystal focus. We had a discussion once about the effectiveness of government programs in response to social ills. I was given a handful of government programs that Robert deemed effective. I'll admit that I did not look them up. I kept thinking of the big ones. Social Security, Medicaire, The new drug benefit, WELFARE, section 8 housing. Each creating it's own set of problems requiring even more government intervention. The country is already one-third socialist but that doesn't seem to be enough to bring humanity out of its misery. Let's make it 50% or 75% so we can be like Europe where everyone's happy and free! Interesting. Why not just hand our pay-checks over to the government and let other people decide how best to spend the fruits of our labor. But what about the ones who suffer?, Robert asks. If government alleviates their misery then it robs them of their innate ability to alleviate their own misery. People become less capable of surviving in the world when government programs fail.

Anne
Right on with Rudy's illegal alien faux pas. This alone is likely to put the bow on his birdcage. RINO, for sure.
And i agree the most attractive thing about Fred so far, is that he left a senate seat he was favored (memory) to re-win. He is not apparently a power freak, he does not revel in the political cesspool in DC. He may actually be an unadulterated patriot. At this point, my primary vote is his to lose.

GunnyG: I think you're right on!

And the other thing is that Fred really didn't pursue this on his own. More than anything he was pulled into running, just like Eisenhower, who was a very good pres.



Rather vote Fred than Red
Wow, look at all the responses this article has created! Looks like Fred's just gonna 'cool' his way into the White House. This is driving the kooks crazy and the commies are having fits.

Fred is exactly what this country needs at this time. Someone who has the brains; is not looking to remake the world; and isn't particularly keen on running so he/she can control the most powerful economy and war machine that has ever existed.

I believe what he says about why he is running. The rest of the candidates are a bunch of back-biting politicians who have only one thing on their minds...to become the most powerful person on earth. Scary.

SandMan/Okay, see ya! Don't let the door

smack you in the backside on your way OUT!



Jonah Goldberg is OK, but...
You know, I don't have anything against Goldberg, but a lot of OTHER people have quite a few complaints about him. Let me detail for you all the criticisms of those OTHER people.

Sound familiar? It should, because that is what Goldberg is laughingly trying to pass off on his readers. This kind of catty, cowardly and sophomoric approach is what has cooled me considerably to Goldberg's opinions and positions over the past few years.

I am not sure if anyone can even agree on what a "neo-con" is anymore, but for what it is worth, JG strikes me as being one in all the negative sense of the term. Consequently, I find myself less and less interested in what he has to say.


Fredheads?
Can't say I particularily like that as a nickname; however, if that is the best we can come up with I'll accept it - temporarily, I hope.

I, like many others, have been waiting patiently since spring for the "official" announcement of Fred's hat being thrown into the ring. Fortunately for all of us he has made the right decision and we now have a candidate that we can communicate with. When I refer to we, I mean the people who make up the majority of the tax paying, non-complainers who go about the business of being good, solid, patriotic Americans. We come from all walks, all ethnic groups and all races. We do not consider Fred the Messiah, nor the Second Coming. We do consider him as our next best hope for the kind of President this country needs at this time.

For those of you who want something of substance in addition to a "Gut Feeling" I suggest that you go to your search engines and start looking up Fred's background and accomplishments. You will discover that his label: "lazy" is just that - a LABEL. Similar in concept to John Edwards calling the WOT a Bumper Sticker.

I agree on the landslide approach and I too will send my donations of ten or more dollars per payday until he succeeds is WINNING! Go FRED Go!

Papasnake37

To Chris continued
Fred's record has as many holes in it as any of the other candidates. Your apology about McCain-Feingold will not wash. Fred wanted his name on it he was so much a part of it! LOL again. Oh, BTW, can Romney get a pass on his abortion change the way you are giving Fred a pass on this? Didn't think so. (FYI - Fred was a pro-choice guy thinking that abortion was a-okay through the first trimester at one time. At least Romney always personally believed it was wrong.)

Electability. Yes, now we are at the crux of the matter. Fred is counting on his personality to win it for him. He believes he can win without campaigning, but merely making TV and Internet appearences, because he has that "folksy charm everyone is so enamored with. Hey, I like to hear the man as much as the next person, but I find it arrogant and presumptious for Fred to think he can sucker all of us that way. It's not going to work for me.

Charismatic statesman - who Fred? I don't think he quite reaches that level yet. But, I'll tell you what, if he's the nominee I'll vote for him. I just don't think it's going to happen. He will probably be his own undoing, unless he gets off his hind end and starts to earn his support.

Chris
You said, "What Fredheads get and why we don't demand to know what Fred's positions on the 'issues' are is because we'd much rather know about a man's core beliefs than to get a reactionary over-simplified blurb on what a man would do about a single topic."

I want to know more than what a candidate's core beliefs are - I want to know if he is an effective leader for those core beliefs. I don't agree that we are getting over-simplified blurbs from the other candidates. They are telling us what they intend to DO, not just what they believe.

Fred's articles are simplistic at best and do not show attention to detail, so we are still left to guess what the priorities of his administration would be and how he would go about governing. Yes, let's hope we get to some details from Fred pretty soon. The other day he said he still has a lot of work to do. (imagine that) He's had 6 long months to decide how to proceed. I hope it doesn't take him that long to make decisions if he is actually elected president. LOL

Your next point was Fred's devotion to the Constitution. I don't think he has cornered the market on that one in this race. And whatever would make you accuse me of not wanting to live under it? Huh? Also, I think ALL of the candidates have said they do not believe in judges legislating from the bench. No monopoly there either - what do you know?

Marie Ragghianti
By the way, Marie is a Democrat.
Think Fred is lazy? Then you must still be reading the Pundits!
With Thompson’s assistance, Ragghianti filed a wrongful termination suit against the office of Governor Blanton. In the Ragghianti case, Thompson helped expose the cash-for-clemency scheme which eventually led to the removal of Blanton from the Governor’s office.

Same 'ol Fred:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbhio11_7c8&NR=1
America can use a man like Fred!

pun·dit (pun'dit) noun.
From American Heritage Dictionary:

pun·dit (pun'dit)
n.

1. A source of opinion; a critic: a political pundit.
2. A learned person.

A pundit's a "learned person"?
Yea, right!

A "source of opinion" that's tired and been repeated hundreds of times already...

Shut up!

Pundits will come and go, but Fred is always Fred... he's older and wiser now,
but he's still the same Fred Thomspon and that's why I'm voting for him!
Fred is Great!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmKUMuPAMSE&NR=1


What I like about Thompson so far
Fred Thompson is a man of reserved power.

He does not have to raise his voice or his energy level in order to come across as strong.

There will be times when he needs to show passion about issues, and when he does let go and allow himself to raise his voice and show the range of his vocal "instrument," watch out!

Compare this to the Democrat(ick) front runner, Shrillary Clinton who feels that it is necessary to try and sound strong all the time. Unfortunately for her, she speaks in a forced lower register, afraid to seem "girlie" in a field of men. When she tries to raise her voice in passion, and above the crowd, she only succeeds in sounding harsh, because she is pushing beyond what her limited voice can carry off.

I know this sounds superficial, but we are facing an enemy who value masculinity above all, and I believe that Fred Thompson would intimidate them.

Cape and Bart
Excellent choice, but make it Hunter-Thompson and get all the votes from braindead dopers who think Hunter Thompson is still alive.

Nick in Austin writes:
Saturday, September, 08, 2007 6:49 AM
"Outside the beltway
We need someone from outside the beltway who can communicate with people. We need a president that people will trust who can push the citizens of America to do the right thing. And we need someone with conservative values - true conservative values.

I think Fred is that man."

================================

Seems there are quite a few of us who see this man as genuine...someone we can trust to lead us and care for our country and take it back to a land of values, conservative values.

If all the liberals in America are so hellbent on becoming a socialistic state, why not just move to Europe and spare themselves a lot of trouble. I do NOT want cradle to grave entitlements, thank you very much.

America is the land of opportunity, and Fred Thompson is a prime example of one who has achieved personal success through hard work and determination.

Once again, just for you, portlandmom
WIN, FRED, WIN!!!!

Bart writes:
Saturday, September, 08, 2007 7:21 PM
"MotleyCrue
Good suggestion; Thompson - Hunter should be unbeatable"

===================

I am with you both on that combo - a winner for sure!

Chris writes:
Saturday, September, 08, 2007 8:04 PM
"Response to Portlandmom
portlandmom wrote:
"I still don't get it, Fredheads
Very few Fredheads give concrete reasons why they support him. How about no more "go Fred Go" and get to the real issues?"

Yes, you do not seem to get it. What Fredheads get and why we don't demand to know what Fred's positions on the 'issues' are is because we'd much rather know about a man's core beliefs than to get a reactionary over-simplified blurb on what a man would do about a single topic.

If you know what someone believes, you know what they will do in a particular situation. That is what all the blogs, articles, and townhalls Fred has been consistently and dilligently generating for the past six months have been about. There is no mystery with Fred and he has made a broad connection with Americans across the board. You don't lead in the polls when you're not even in the race by being an enigma."

=========================

Gosh, Chris, we seem to be on the same wave length...I like what the man stands for and how he thinks. The strong character and personal responsibility he has shown over the years is something that cannot be faked. Fred Thompson is the "genuine article" and it is quite obvious that he has what it takes to lead our country!

Fred, get yourself another red pickup truck if that's what you want to do!

Oh, and just for you, portlandmom, may I add

WIN, FRED, WIN :-)

MotleyCrue writes:
Saturday, September, 08, 2007 8:20 PM
"Well said, Chris, well said.
Fred reminds me of an uncle I once had. I could talk to him about anything, and there would always be a deliberative pause before he answered. Because of that I always took his advice, and 99% of the time he was right. Yep. Someone like that would be refreshing in the oval office."

=========================

Your comments coincide with my general sentiments expressed above - Fred has a down-home likeability rating moreso than any other candidate, Republican or Democrat. And I think the American people are ready for an "uncle" they can trust to make a wise decision!!!

Anne.
Enjoy the Emperor penguins. I'm watching the UFC on Spike, and flicking over to Blue Planet on DSC. A leopard seal just ate a chick...life goes on. A knockout on Spike...life goes on. Robert's lurking somewhere out there...life goes on.

BrianR writes:
Saturday, September, 08, 2007 1:50 AM
"Well, I'll be the first so far, then
I like Fred, I'll vote for him, and I kicked 100 bucks into his campaign the other day..."

=========================

And, Brian, I'll be the most recent poster to state that I, too, am supporting Fred and kicked in $100 after his formal announcement.

I believe his waiting til now is one of the smartest things he's done so far. Who is the guru who deemed it necessary to begin campaigning so early anyhow?

This man has a keen sense of what is needed in any given situation and I hope he will continue to listen to himself, not "advisors" who will try to make him something he isn't.

I just finished reading the Newsweek article on him and what impressed me most is that when left to his own instincts, he succeeds. Fred is not one to be molded into what some political analyst thinks he should be. And from his personal history, he was never a sheep. He knows the value of hard work and has achieved success because of it. I wonder how many other candidates worked two or three jobs to support a young family.

So what if he "marches to a different drummer" - I trust him to do the right thing. And that trust is something I don't feel with the other candidates.

WIN, FRED, WIN!!

You too, Motley and CC....

I think I'm going to sign off now. I've been half watching that "Blue Planet" on the Discovery Channel. It's amazing.

Never gave much thought to getting a flat screen tv, but after watching this program, I'm thinking how incredible it would be on a flat screen.

Have to think more about that....

See ya tomorrow.


Citizen Carrier and Anne.
Agincourt? Stanlingrad? I want blitzkrieg and scorched earth. I want Hiroshima and Nagasaki rolled into one. You're right, citizen, it must be devastating or they'll claim it was stolen. Let's have an Apocalypse this time. Let there be no doubt.

Anne. I heard about Guiliani's comment--a foot in the mouth moment if ever there was one. But good old Rudy's known for talking out of both sides of his mouth. He's totally for amnesty for illegals. He'd be a disaster as POTUS.

Keep up the good fight, Anne.


Motley: Actually, rp's position on

foreign policy not only doesn't make any sense, it's outright dangerous.

Not that ronniepaul has a snowball's chance in ga-lo-BULL warming of making it to the Covention, but were he elected, just would be as if HELLary or B Huessein Obama elected.

It would be only a matter of time... and probably not too much time, before we were inundated with radical Islamics, and not only would our wonderful country no longer be, we all stand a good chance of being dead.

Not exactly a cheery outlook.


Fred's issue positions?
Thompson on issues?

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Fred_Thompson.htm

There's a quick reference guide for his record in the Senate and commments he has made on issues since. Took me about a minute to find that link from Yahoo.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070906/ap_on_el_pr/thompson_issues

There's an even simpler one.

There is one issue that is near and dear to my heart. One I absolutely cannot ignore. Electibility. Fred's electibility is in large part a function of his name/face recognizability. Hillary has similar recognizability. Probably more. Rudy has it too. Essentially, nobody else running has anything close to that name recognition.

Well said, Chris, well said.
Fred reminds me of an uncle I once had. I could talk to him about anything, and there would always be a deliberative pause before he answered. Because of that I always took his advice, and 99% of the time he was right. Yep. Someone like that would be refreshing in the oval office.

Greetings Anne, m'dear.
Glad to see you are carrying on the tradition of battling the evil Darth Vader. May the force be with you. Watching the debate, I realized something you must already be aware of: RP sounds like a querulous little girl. He has a voice that would make a cat yowl, and to make matters worse he expounds foreign policy positions that make absolutely no sense.

Response to Portlandmom contd

Thompson is an 'originist' when it comes to law and matters of the Constitution. He believes that right and wrong are not maliable concepts driven by mob sentiment or fringe group whims and that the original intent and purpose of the U.S. Constitution defines what this America is. If you don't like this document and if you don't want to accept living under the precepts that comprise it then you are free to leave. He plans on only supporting judges who adhere to this view of Constitutional interpretation. He doesn't believe in judges legislating from the bench.

Of all the leading Repubs in the race who have a genuine shot at winning the Presidency because of the 'electability' factor, he has the most consistent voting record. His Congressional scorecard is an 86 out of 100. There are issues he has never compromised on. The only glaring blackmark on his votiing record was his support for McCain-Feingold where he thought the intent of the bill was other that it was and did not fully perceive it's ramifications. He has said that he would not have voted for it knowing what he knows now.

There are several votes where he was the only vote of opposition, 99-1.

So, if you want someone who is going to promise a quick fix and give you a simple but unrealistic answer on an 'issue' to fulfil your need for immediate gratification, Fred is not your man. If, on the other hand, you want someone who is going to dealve deeply into undoing the socialistic policies that have greatly damaged our nation over the last forty years, someone who can communicate well with the American people, and someone who garners the respect of those on the other side of the aisle, like Reagan did, because of his 'likeability' and charasmatic presence as a statesman; then maybe you too can become a Fredhead.



Response to Portlandmom
portlandmom wrote:
"I still don't get it, Fredheads
Very few Fredheads give concrete reasons why they support him. How about no more "go Fred Go" and get to the real issues?"

Yes, you do not seem to get it. What Fredheads get and why we don't demand to know what Fred's positions on the 'issues' are is because we'd much rather know about a man's core beliefs than to get a reactionary over-simplified blurb on what a man would do about a single topic.

If you know what someone believes, you know what they will do in a particular situation. That is what all the blogs, articles, and townhalls Fred has been consistently and dilligently generating for the past six months have been about. There is no mystery with Fred and he has made a broad connection with Americans across the board. You don't lead in the polls when you're not even in the race by being an enigma.


I did, Robert, and...
I didn't notice any change in direction with the elevation of the Nancy and Harry Show to the primetime lineup. If anything, such questions as "Generally speaking, would you say things in this country are heading in the right direction, or are they off on the wrong track?" (the AP-Ipsos poll question, though they're all pretty much like that) would muddle the responses after last November's election by adding more conservatives to the "wrong track" number.

Divided government has a way of doing that. Everyone blames everyone else, and it's high negatives all around.

Your smiling at Congressional approval ratings in the sub-20 zone confirms for me that you are delusional. Brace yourself for this little nugget, look upon its implications and despair: neither Bush nor Cheney will be on the 2008 ballot.

Heading for a post-McGovern Moment...
Wish I could remember where I read this. Probably "National Review". The writer was commenting on a discussion he had with a female editor of "The New Yorker" magazine immediately after the Nixon vs. McGovern election of 1972.

She said, "I can't believe Nixon won. I don't know a single person who voted for him."

Nixon took 49 states and McGovern took Massachuessetts. Perhaps it would've done her some good to get out of Manhatten every once and awhile and travel the country?

I've seen stories on Drudge where GOP activists and staffers quietly admit that they WANT HRC to be the democrat nominee. The reasons? She has 45% to 50% disapproval numbers among Americans. We have never elected a person with such numbers. She's still a junior Senator. Americans do not historically elect Senators to the Executive (in fairness, I must apply the same hardship to Fred). She's female. They have an even worse track record of being elected President than do Senators.

Robert
O.k.,I'll admit,1 post does not a trend make. Next time I'll try better,but your 3:52 post was what got me. I get a E.

Rudy might just be toast about now!!!!
Rudy: Illegal Immigration Not a Crime
Posted by: Matt Lewis at 7:03 PM
Rudy Giuliani is making a big mistake.

I'm not sure, but it might just be that Rudy has handed the nomination to Thompson or Hunter (or maybe Romney, but I doubt it.)

But the funniest thing is that this is going to give much more time to focus on Fred, which is going to make the pauists ca-ra-zy!




MotleyCrue
Good suggestion; Thompson - Hunter should be unbeatable

and besides...
If the Democrats were really interested in trying "something new", then Obama would be in the lead. Sure, it's the same tired Socialist message, but at least he's a new face.

(And here's one for Jonah.... Lisa: "that's just the same old Malibu Stacy!" Smithers: "but she's got a new hat!")

Fred
Ok,Robert,I'll admit I'm not the GENIUS that you are, so go back,read Hal,and your comments,then tell me where I'm wrong in believing you guys think it is in the bag already. Enjoy the crow sandwich. and,by the by,there,Robert, I actually CAN read. I'm sure that will come as a HUGE surprise to you. The only thing I can't match you on is sheer arrogance,and condescension.

THE BEST PRESIDENT

.....Is the one that does the least amount of harm to the Country ...

.....I remember driving along the Interstate in the fifties behind a Semi that someone had written in the grime ..."another load of golf balls for Ike" ...

.....this was a joke in reference to the medias main criticism of Ike ...that he spent too much time on the golf links and not enough time in the Oval office ...

.....yet he got us out of Korea and kept us out of war for eight years ...the Interstate was his main domestic accomplishment and being in the Oval office is not the measure of a President ...(Clinton spent a lot of time in the Oval orifice) ...so by the criteria of doing the least amount of harm to the Country ...Ike gets high marks ...

.....Two Presidents who did the greatest harm to the Country are Carter and LBJ ...we are still suffering from the mistakes of those two dolts ...

.....so Fred's laid back country style manner might be just what the doctor ordered to counter an over active ...radical change oriented ...Socialist inclined Congress .....COLOSSUS

Fred & the rest
Johna's article was about Fred Thompson interring the race' is it to late etc. If the debates have helped any sensible person make up their mind about whom should be our next Republican Presidential nominee, May the gods protect us. The debates to this point have been a complete farce. 20 second sound bites just don't cut it.
I've read in several articles question to Fred, what are you going to do about........what ever. When are these same questions to all the other Candidates going to be ask? Ever?
I think it was very intelligent of Fred to by pass the Media window dressing until now. He has saved many wasteful millions of $ while obtaining maximum press coverage; this is one example of conservative spending I like. It's a shame the other candidates do not have similar concerns.
We the people of this country are foolish at best; in this era of instant information the campaign schedule should be shorter not longer!

Robert -- reading not your thing, is it?
Thanks, Robert, but I did not write that. My 4:24pm post was the one that speculated that you were on crack for projecting that Gore or Hillary would carry between 35 and 38 states.

"and after two tems [sic] of incompetence a lot of people are ready to try something new."

I could take up a lot of time and space with a vigorous and effective defense of this president on many issues; I could also slam him up against the wall for others. But I'll try to keep it short and keep the use of polysyllabic words to a minimum so that you might better understand. It may have escaped your notice that the Congress of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid polls consistently lower than the president and that pretty much half the prospective electorate damns Hillary Clinton's name. Does that really sound like the makings of a Democrat landslide to you? Put down the pipe and seek out rehab.

Meanwhile, I too would love to put a sticker on my car that read "Thompson-Hunter". Just because. Maybe with the tagline "Fear and Loathing in San Francisco"?

Hey Motley: I heard that. That Cal is

really good! He hit the nail on the head, again!



roberto says he "must seem like someone

who can do anything..."

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha


Oh roberto...

No, it's painfully clear that you probably CAN'T do much of anything. You make things up and imagine all the things you'd like to do, or wish you could do...but alas... it's only imagined adventures, Walter Mitty style.

You do know who Walter Mitty is, don't you?

You've been "busted" so many times, we've all lost count.







35 States?
Why does anybody suppose HRC would get any more states than did Kerry or Gore? States don't change their tunes that drastically.

Gore and Kerry didn't go into the election with 45-50% personal disapproval ratings in the polls either. Yet somehow, a deeply polarizing figure like Hillary, with no personal executive experience and a pretty thin resume all around is somehow going to garner more states than did Gore or Kerry?

By what possible twisted syllogism do we arrive at that conclusion? Is an east coast, blue stater type like Hillary going to make in-roads into the Southern states? Nope. Not even Gore, ostensibly from Tennessee, managed that.

Folks, HRC is beatable. Imminently beatable. The only question we have to answer is "By what margin to we want to beat her?" As I've already stated, a Huckabee type 51% vs. 49% win simply won't do. I want Agincourt. I want Stalingrad.

A baritone for all seasons.
Cal Thomas on Fox News Watch just described FDT as a baritone in a field of tenors...and, let me add, one falsetto, namely Ron Paul.

Another post gone bye bye.
What the heck is going on with TH lately? Let's see if this posts. Oh, and Robert, James Earl Jones won't like it if you try to claim his alter-ego.

Dwight
'I'm waiting for Fred Thompson to say; "I've reread the Constitution, and voting for 'Campaign Finance Reform' was a mistake."'

Fred has repudiated his position on the M/F legislation. I'm sure you'll hear it again during the course of the campaign.

Robert
As always you bloviate and are just plain wrong.


Bye-Bye Have a nice day Walter!!!!

The Ignore Robert Rule of Order
I've noticed there's a remarkable restraint in dealing with 'Robert' - he's simply been 'shined on'. He's ranted at or tried to engage everyone with a conservative viewpoint and no one's paid him the slightest attention - admirable!
_____

I, too, was an early enthusiastic supporter of FDT but developed an irritation at his commitment delays - and told them so. But I hasten to add that I am persuaded by Fred's maturity in that his campaign won't be controlled by the dictates of the media.

As in the past, I repeat - membership in an organization does not dictate a person's views. I'm sure there are plenty of lawyer members of the ABA that can't stand that organization's official views; or teachers in the commie teacher's unions that can't stand their positions; etc.

I'm a 'member' of National Geographic, clearly a leftist enviro group, by virtue of a mag subscription - I like their photography and even read their articles. I'm exposed to their viewpoints even though I don't buy their agenda.

The CFR used to be a prestigious discussion group but like so many bureaucratic organizations, their leadership became dominated by leftists. This is no accident because the first, last and most important consideration of lib/leftists, once they ascend to positions of leadership and/or authority, is to cull out all dissenting viewpoints regardless of competence or merit.

Fred should not be branded with official CFR views by virtue of being a member. On the contrary, he should be commended for the inviting exposure to foreign policy arguments - something the totally ignorant Obama might have profited from.

If Duncan Hunter can show some traction, he might have my support but Fred has a decent shot at exciting the base of which I'm a part.

Motley Crue
P.S. Notice the Dems haven't said one word about illegal immigration?

Motley Crue
I also agree with Tea Party and you as well. I would love to see Hunter on the ticket. My husband who works for HS would love to see Skeletor(Chertoff)go bye-bye and Hunter take his place because he knows they will actually get some things done without wasting so much money.

Hello, Lolo2. I see you're still
fighting the good fight. I have to agree with Tea Party, when it comes to the debates. They're not debates, to my way of thinking. They're standard answers to standard soundbites. And, like the Dimwit Demos talking to falsetto snowmen, they're about things the media have decided are important, not what the public is necessarily concerned about.

As for Fred. I think he'd be unstoppable with Hunter on the ticket. Just a personal observation based on Hunter's performance at the, er, debate.

Add
my agreement with citizen carriers post. I'm tired of the plastic, canned happy days are here again candidates. And I'm glad for whatever reason Fred chose to announce after Labor Day which I understand was traditional for many elections. I sick and tired of the propaganda already, tired of the plastic smiles. I haven't decided who I'll vote for in the primaries just yet although I have always had high regard for Duncan Hunter (he seems to have a quiet strength about him, a man we can trust). Otherwise, I like Huckabee,(he doesn't seem to equivocate), I like Tancredo because he's had the courage of his convictions regarding illegal alien invaders.
And there's Fred. I hate the term "debate" those aren't debates and I don't blame Fred for skipping it. The only debate last week was between Huckabee and Paul, the rest was canned.
I think the campaigns and media are afraid of
real debates, what we get instead are canned soundbites. Not all Americans are dumb downed like the elites try to tell us.

Countryman
It wasn't rumsfield that screwed up the aftermath so much as it was Bremmer.

Dwight
He said he was glad that the SCOTUS threw out part of it, because that was one of his biggest mistakes.

GunnyG
Just wanted you to know I read your blog today, and loved it!!
You are now on my "favorites" list.
I missed you while you were gone.

Fred Thompson
I'm waiting for Fred Thompson to say; "I've reread the Constitution, and voting for 'Campaign Finance Reform' was a mistake."

Dwight Broadstone

Steve L
I don't know just what type of managers any of the candidates are as yet, micro or macro, but I would want a President who focuses on the big picture and trusts those under him to handle the details.

Yes, in the instance of the free-for-all in Baghdad, there was no planning ahead for it, but that just means both the macro and micro managers slipped up. If Bush had been more of a student of warfare, he might have said to Rumsfeld on the eve of invasion "Okay Don, it's all in your hands now. Oh, by the way, did you think of what might happen with the civilians after we capture Baghdad? You might make some plans for that," and let it go at that.

A micromanager may be more likely to react to enfolding events, trying to keep up with them, while a macromanager who isn't saddled with details has the freedom to think ahead and plan for all contingencies.

Robert, on crack
"right now I suspect that either Gore or HRC would carry oh 35 of the 50...maybe 38"

Isn't it wonderful and self-satisfying to kick big numbers about like that? But those aren't just numbers. They are states, chock full of voters, and the liberals are smoking something pungent if they think they'll ever take more than half. With Hillary the all but certain nominee, and half of likely voters swearing on holy relics that they will never ever vote for her, I'm wondering whether they'll even get the 19 (plus, of course, the un-GOP-able DC) they got last time.

Robert. Glad to see you're
still around. You do keep things on a lighter note, I have to admit. Even though most of what you say has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Got to go for a while. By y'all.

Fred
Gee,Robert,is there consensus on the election already,as well? Michigan thought Appalachin State couldn't win,either. Hal and yourself seem to think it's over before it starts. Good Luck,enjoy those liver& onion sammiches,they may just turn to crow!!

The problem with Robert
Is that he just refuses to accept the fact that we all know he's just an arrogant blowhard who ONLY THINKS he knows as much as he knows.
EVERY TIME Roberts foolishness and ignorance on a subject is exposed he just acts like that post never existed or the poster must be on drugs.
It kinda reminds me of the other "Know it all" whom I'm sure we all "know he's right" on absolutely everything.

THE ONLY THING either of these two blithering idiots know for sure is that they make complete and utter fools of themselves every time they hit the "Post Your Comments" button.
But like all libs, they don't care, truth and intelligence are just obstacles that keep getting in the way of their agenda of dumbing down those who can't be force fed their socialist agenda in the public schools/universities.

Yeah
Robert writes: Saturday, September, 08, 2007 3:55 PM
I dont know...
GunnyG writes: Saturday, September, 08, 2007 3:24 PM ....

but your attempt to discuss physical apperance and link it with politics says a lot about your "thougth" processes.

I can see how you peaked at "Middle manager"...(we have had a good laugh over that)

Robert
-------------------------

Not everyone can become a police officer, chemical engineer, spy, jet pilot, helicopter pilot, joint chief of staff, and six star general in the NavArMarineForce like Robert... Or did you get your seventh star by now?

Citizen Carrier writes:
I want a hideous annihilation of a landslide. A Reaganesque smackdown of biblical proportions. I want to send those jerks down the road talking to themselves.

The images are terrific. Don't you just love it.

And greetings to Anne, GunnyG, and all the conservatives on this site. Oh, and how are you today, Robert?


Speaking of The Angry Dwarf
I wonder if it is the inner uglyness of libs and their foul ideology of liberalism that exudes to reflect on their personage over time. Kucinch and James Carville are vying for the person who looks the most like Gollum. Hillary's polyester pantsuits hold two hams and a pork butt. Lynne Stewart, Andrea Dworkin, Helen Thomas, and a host of other libsquirts are as hard on the eyes as the ending of Odeipus. The Goreacle is looking more like Boss Hog every day and The Breck Girl is morphing into a genderless neutral with the future name of Edwina.

Took too long??
A decade ago, announcing in September would have been a little early, or on time at the worst. Just because the 24-hour news cycle has created the 24 month, or even 36 month primary, doesn't mean that we all have to make our mind up on a candidate the minute after the previous election ends.

Sorry, but I am glad Thompson took a while to enter the election. Why waste a fortune on early campaigning, when he can get the same results by spending much less in the few months preceding the election?

Oops, double post.
Sorry, can't erase my edited, shorter version.

Ron Paul is our Kucinich
There are more conservative candidates out there than Fred. On every "select the candidate" quiz I've taken out of curiosity, Ron Paul finishes behind every other Republican and just in front of every Democrat. Hardly conservative. So why do I support Fred?

After 7 years of "selected, not elected", "Bush lied, people died", the adjective "Nazi" thrown around like rice at a wedding, that smirking jackass on "The Daily Show" and ON and On and on...I don't want to just win the election.

I want a hideous annihilation of a landslide. A Reaganesque smackdown of biblical proportions. I want to send those jerks down the road talking to themselves. With Hillary's combination of inevitable nomination and ridiculously high disapproval ratings, we have a historic opportunity to do this.

With the exceptions of Fred, Rudy, and maybe McCain, every SINGLE Rebublican candidate running could disappear into any crowd. Eat an entire meal at any restaurant outside their state--and some within--totally unrecognized.

Now, against Hillary I would low-crawl across 300 meters of broken beer bottles to vote for Rudy, but Fred is obviously more conservative.
His face and voice are instantly recognizable by millions of movie and television watchers. Folks, he's going INTO the race with that asset. The others will have to work like crazy to earn it in the time available.

Citizen Carrier
"Ron Paul is our Kucinich"

WELL SAID!

Citizen Carrier: "Ron Paul is our Kucini

Thank you!!! I've been saying that for months now.... actually since the first Republican debate when ronniepaul shot himself in the foot with that lame "Blame America" comment.



Ron Paul is our Kucinich
Most internet "select your candidate" quizzes I've taken have me agreeing with Duncan Hunter at around 84% of the time. Followed closely by Tancredo, Huckabee and Romney in various orders.

Paul usually comes in just in front of all the Democrats for me. I consider myself pretty conservative, so I can only conclude that Paul isn't the "conservative" for me if he is constantly one notch above Joe Biden on these tests.

But despite all that, I'm supporting Fred. Why?

After 7 years of "selected, not elected", "Bush lied, people died", the adjective "Nazi" thrown around like rice at a wedding, that smirking jackass on "The Daily Show" and ON and On and on...I don't want to just win the election.

I want a hideous annihilation of a landslide. A Reaganesque smackdown of biblical proportions. I want to send those jerks down the road talking to themselves. With Hillary's combination of inevitable nomination and ridiculously high disapproval ratings, we have a historic opportunity to do this.

With the exceptions of Fred, Rudy, and maybe McCain, every SINGLE Rebublican candidate running could disappear into any crowd. Eat an entire meal at any restaurant outside their state--and some within--totally unrecognized.

Now, against Hillary I would low-crawl across 300 meters of broken beer bottles to vote for Rudy, but Fred is obviously more conservative. Sure, I only agree with him about 72% of the time compared to Hunter's 84%, but Fred has been "running" for the Presidency for about 20 years now. He just didn't know it.

His face and voice are instantly recognizable by millions of movie and television watchers. Folks, he's going INTO the race with that asset. The others will have to work like crazy to earn it in the time available.

Jonah Goldberg
That fact that he is strolling and not running gives him and up in my book. These other candidates want it a little too much which makes them suspect.

Wait, did I read that correctly...?

roberto actually called Tancredo and "nut?"

TH's own resident nut-case? Our own little "Walter-Mitty-Nutty?"

The same roberto who has DONE EVERYTHING, BEEN EVERYPLACE, and oh yeah, KNOWS EVERYTHING ABOUT EVERYTHING????

That roberto called Tancredo and "nut?"


Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha


national sales tax
And the thing I hate most about the "Fair Tax" is that its supporters call it the "Fair Tax", as though one couldn't possibly be against it: I mean, after all, it's fair -- it's right there in the name.

Unless it is a tax on fairs -- which would really cut into the carny economy, let me tell you -- just start calling it a national sales tax, and quit with the stupid off-putting spin.

LandO?
Robert, what the heck is LandO? If it's an abbreviation, please spell it out. What does it have to do with Fred?

"juvenile zionist neocon"
That's the thing I love most about the folks who support Ron Paul: they're so persuasive!

To Ron Paul supporters
Ron's soulution ti the war wont work. He's not setting the criteria. We know what it is and who is setting it its OBL who said:
there were two solutions to stopping the Iraq war. "One is from our side, and it is to escalate the fighting and killing against you. This is our duty, and our brothers are carrying it out," bin Laden said.
"The second solution is from your side. ... I invite you to embrace Islam," he said.

I would submit there is at least a third option and thats to exterminate the vermin where ever they are.

TRADITIONAL "STAND"
Tradition does have a place in the twenty-first century; albeit, the maintenance of traditional forms is becoming increasingly difficult. Abraham Lincold did "run for President." He made speaches and wrote papers reprintedin newspapers and journals which citizens then actually read. Southerners rejected the premise of a Lincoln presidency because they read his papers and understood the institution of slavery had met a match in a personage that would egffectively resist its growth and continuation. The voted for Breckenridge, the Vice-President under the previous administration, who with succession donned a Confederate uniform and fought against the National goverment at the Shiloh and Fort Stevens (Washington DC) battlefields. I would prefer that Fred Thompson or any candidate "stand" as opposed to "run" for the attention and acceptance of the people.

Wow, what a condescending jerk
Jonah wrote; "Right now, the only bandwagon for a message even remotely like that is the Ron Paul campaign, and unfortunately, that bandwagon has no brakes. It long ago barreled past conservatism to swampy territory outside the borders of common sense."


You would've said the same of those who wanted to bolt England for a better life here. You would've said the same of the drafters of the Constitution too I'm sure. Radicals have ALWAYS been passed off as nuts by the likes of you, which is how we've been continuously SCREWED by Repubs since '94 and beyond. The status quo is no longer acceptable.

Move over dinasaur, we're taking over.

I hope Fred is lazy
except for security issues. The less government the beter. Do we want an Edward's like figure who has "a program of the day" campagining philosophy??? Of course not!

I am interested in him right away because he appears to be his own man and will not be an orthodox candidate. Besides, already he has written about small givernment, strong military, anti-illegal immigration, all dear to my heart.

Thanks, jb
jb pointed out one of the major things I've liked about Fred from the beginning but just now realized: Fred either answers a question or says why he won't. Most politicians -- particularly liberals but most conservatives as well -- respond to tough questions by talking about something else. I have more respect for a person who says "I don't know. Let me look into that before I give you my opinion" than people who shoot from the hip like most politicians do. Some just don't seem to be able to answer even the simplest question; they just have to pontificate on something else.

A case in point was the previous Republican debate when the question of the Fair Tax was raised. Mike Huckabee said very clearly that he supports the Fair Tax and why. Others' responses ranged from rejecting the Fair Tax without a logical reason or demonstrating their complete lack of knowledge of the subject. I had a neutral to mildly negative opinion of Huckabee before that debate but, as a Fair Tax supporter, I'm now taking another look at him. The others have just given me another reason to ignore them.

Fred's a big government
CINO. He was the major player in the creation of the Homeland Security Dept, and was one of the major players in McCain/Feingold.

He's a CFR globalist who wants continual war to pad the accounts of the corporate whores who are his friends.

The only way for conservatism to go forward is to nominate either Paul or Hunter. Any other nominee means disaster to true conservatives.

Fred Thompson
Expediency Personified

The benefits of whittling
Have you ever TRIED whittling? It's actually quite relaxing and good for your mental health. Plus you can use the pointy end of the stick to "reason" with liberals. It's win-win.

Federalism
Ronald Reagan's success did not just come from his brilliant communication skills; those are only an asset if you have something to communicate. Reagan is one of the few presidents in history to come to Washington with a fully formed philosophy of government. He knew what government should and should not do, and he made it clear to his staff and his cabinet. As such he could use his hands-off approach with great success, because everybody knew the ground rules.

Can Thompson do the same? His blogs tend to show that he is a deep thinker when it comes to federalism and the role of the federal government. He has the potential to be a great president, but only time will tell if he can really pull it off.

Newsflash
Fred is already gaffing in Iowa. It only took two days. Crash and burn campaigning at its best.

http://letters.salon.com/politics/war_room/2007/09/07/thompson3/view/?show=all

So Fred wouldn't follow the rules.
He decided instead to sit back on a comfortable seat and chat with Jay Leno, instead of standing behind a podium answering canned questions. And in front of five million people instead of two. Well, bully for him. I notice for the first five minutes or so, the other candidates were talking about Fred's absence.

Great. Just what we want in a POTUS, sitting behind his desk in the oval office wandering what's up with Fred.

So what about folksy charm
Yes, Fred is fun to listen to, but where's the beef? I'm still waiting for someone to show me his qualifications. He's not a solid conservative when you look at his record. He has no leadership experience whatsoever. He thought his Senate job was boring. Huckabee has more qualifications and should hold the 3rd spot in the top tier, or Duncan Hunter - he's got substance, Fred does not.

So what about the late entry, but what about skipping the debate? He just did what he had to do - go to an easy forum and just let his personality take over. I'm not sure that's the kind of CEO we need. He knew he simply could not compete in the debate so he didn't even try. The next debate will be more interesting - will he find an excuse to skip out or will he get in and have to answer some questions?

baseballdoc
".....I think Paul and his followers are living in a fools paradise ...As President Paul would be totally ineffective ...he would be stymied and frustrated by Congress ...He would be maligned by the Liberal Press and made the butt of late nite show jokes ...he would be a one term President and make Carter's term look like a success by comparison ..."

So people should give up their dreams and ideals and hopes?

I don't disagree though, he'd be ineffective...hmmm, is that so bad? ;-)

Fred
Baseballdoc: Excellent analysis, You are spot-on.

Yes, but can he think on his feet?
I was enthusiastic about Thompson's entry ...in June and in July but I have to say that his continual delays left me worried. Was it smarts that kept him waiting or was it unpreparedness? Did he avoid the debate because he can't think quickly or can't make decisions? Does he really know and understand the issues or did his "politically savy" wife decide he could be packaged as "the next Reagan"?

I'm not sold on him. He's going to have to convince me that he's the man for the job. Why DID he avoid the debate? The fact that Mary Matalin is working for his campaign makes me concerned that we have another "Rockefeller Republican" in the guise of a "Reagan Republican".

Frankly, Mike Huckabee strikes me as the real deal. He's got all the folksy charm of Fred Thompson AND he can articulate his ideas and debate with opponents. Why would you want a straw man when you've got a real candidate in front of you?

Hillary
will destroy what's left of America. I cannot support McWolf-in-sheep's-clothing or Rudy. Who can beat Hillary so that we live to see another day? I think Fred is the man.

THE PROBLEM WITH PAUL

.....Unless he plans to emulate Caesar and declare himself tyrant (to save the Republic) ...he will never get any of his ideas through Congress ...

.....Can he eliminate the IRS by Executive Order? ...What about the 16th Amendment? ...can he eliminate the CIA because there is no provision for it in the Constitution? ...

.....Can he return the Federal Government to its Constitutional role and restore States Rights? ...The Civil War and the Civil Rights act of 1965 pretty much ended States Rights ...is Paul going to reverse 100 years of laws? ...

.....I think Paul and his followers are living in a fools paradise ...As President Paul would be totally ineffective ...he would be stymied and frustrated by Congress ...He would be maligned by the Liberal Press and made the butt of late nite show jokes ...he would be a one term President and make Carter's term look like a success by comparison ...

.....GW has already done grievous harm to the Republican Party ...Paul would preside over its demise .....COLOSSUS

TR was not a conservative.
He was a fun guy, and had a huge presence, but his actions screwed up Central America, messed up what should have been a privately owned canal from the Gulf to the Pacific Ocean. He grew government like a Bush, and frolicked in places he shouldn't have.

I know he had an appealing personna, but Taft was the last great conservative president, and Teddy sucked.

SecretSquirrel2
Check my blog amigo, looks like the Dhimmicrats already JOINED OBL!

Jonah Goldberg on Thomson
Jonah, I think the others started to soon. They are digging themselves holes by not being consistent with their answers. Fred has a plan and I don't think i includes standing on a stage listening to others make, in some cases, make fools of thenselves. I don't know if he is the "ONE", but we will soon find out and frankly I don't give a hoot if he sits in a rocking chair or not as long as he makes things happen.

timesmatters-reformgov.blogspot.com
Jack Cruger
E-Mail crugerjohn@tahoo.com

SteveL
I agree as to our rise but we weren't at the level we were in 45.

I DEFINATELY agree on your position on Ron Paul if HE'd have been in TR's shoes. We'd probably be at the level of Mexico about now.

I don't want a candidate
like Rudy that answers every question with what he did in NY, or nasty McCain who thinks he can say anything he wants and get away with it because he was a POW, and I don't want Mitt who says whatever he thinks on any given day regardless of what he said yesterday. I don't want a candidate that will tell he on a routine basis what Obama, Edwards, or Hillary will do..........I want one that will tell me what HE will do and so far, that is what Fred has done in his blog. I will follow this campaign very carefully because this is probably the most important of our lifetime and I want to get it right. There will only be one chance......I've no desire to join Islam.

Fredheads
Many of the Fred supporters in the above thread seem to be supporting Fred because he is a "Christian". Did I miss something?

Fred does not walk on water. He is not even Huckabee. I do not get the impression that Fred is all that "Christian" nor does he do much more than give lip service to "Christian" social causes. His lifestyle is more Hollywood/DC than down home South.

He is not supporting the Marriage Amendment because Federalism is more important to him. That gives you an idea of what is really important to him. This guy is no social conservative. He may vote right some of the time but his heart is not really in it.

He is not going to provide leadership on social conservative causes. Like Gingrich he will find a way to pursue his own agenda while using social conservatives for foot soldiers. I am tired of being used. I am also tired of Southerners who talk a good line but who have not intention of delivering.

for GunnyG
GunnyG writes: "Like it or not WW2 made us a superpower."

Actually, America had first gotten herself noticed as a major power thanks to the Spanish-American War. Which led to the Panama Canal, the Teddy Roosevelt Administration and his "Great White Fleet" expedition. America started behaving like a global power for the first time.

A guy like Ron Paul would never have supported any of that. He would probably have negotiated with Spain because he would have (correctly) pointed out that Spain wasn't really a strategic threat to us. They weren't. But history would have run very differently if we hadn't kicked their butts out of the Western Hemisphere.

for jerabaub
jerabaub writes: "I think it was Brian, recently left me with the conclusion he "apes" the Bush/neocon line on Iraq. I was hoping for some innovation, not rehash of failed policies."

The polls explain why:

According to the most recent poll I saw, an amazing 83% (!!!) of self-described Christian evangelicals still APPROVE of President Bush's job performance. They still love the guy, even now.

As numerous analysts and columnists have already pointed out, when the evangelical Christian base still adores Bush, no GOP candidate can afford to break with Bush to any great extent because they need that GOP base to campaign for them.

So even to propose something different than Bush would come off sounding like a veiled criticism of Bush.

InsightingTruth
While I partially agree with you (pulling out of Germany and Japan and relocating elsewhere) nature abhors a vacuum. We leave, someone else comes in. That's how it works. So we pull out of the M.E., who takes over? China? Iran? Somehow, I DON'T think that those are viable choices to the continuation of America.

Like it or not WW2 made us a superpower.

for Poretto
Poretto writes: "Thanks to our horrific government-run schools, most Americans don't remember the brilliant successes of the two LEAST active presidents in our history: Grover Cleveland and Calvin Coolidge....But in both cases, they restrained Washington very effectively"

Those examples are irrelevant for today because we're at WAR now.

Cleveland and Coolidge were not wartime Presidents and they didn't have to lead America into a war in multiple countries. The next President's primary job is going to be Commander-in-Chief of a nation at war, NOT "restraining Washington."

Get your priorities straight. The main priority today is winning the War on Terror. NOT reducing government entitlements or stopping abortion or stopping same-sex marriage. It's WAR, winning WAR, victory in WAR.

Abortion, same-sex marriage, entitlements, taxes, etc., are important things. But they pale in significance to the War on Terror.

That is, after all, just what the Republican Party has said to the American people for the last 6 years, isn't it?

ATTN Libdolts
Clyde posted the NEW Dhimmicrat motto on my blog.

Felt you idiots should know if before Hitlary uses it.

The Democrat Party: The Choice of Terrorists the World Over".

See my blog for the result of OBL's video within the Dhimmicrat Party.

for Countryman
Countryman writes: 'it all depends what you want in a chief executive.
Option 1: someone who is running around like a chicken with its head cut off, micromanaging this, examining that, organizing this, reorganizing that.
Option 2: Someone who delegates on the little things, sits back,"

Given how the Iraq War turned out, it's clear that America really needs option 1, NOT option 2. Sorry.

Remember that as soon as Baghdad fell to coalition forces, looting and lawlessness ran rampant, and shortly thereafter an insurgency got started. It's precisely because Bush "sat back and delegated" to Rumsfeld that things got so out of hand. An obsessive micro-manager like Giuliani wouldn't have made that mistake. Giuliani chased the squeegie men and the porno shops out of New York as a prerequisite to reducing the overall crime rate. He didn't just "sit back and delegate." He would have personally chased every Iraqi looter back to their holes if need be.

Sorry, we're at WAR now and "sitting back and delegating" has PROVEN to be a failed strategy.

The issue is not forgiveness.
The issue is reclaiming republican government. Fred will not do that, so I am not looking forward to voting for him.

FYI GunnyG:
Noninterventionism is not equal to isolationism. And, Congressman Paul has suggested that we can safely reduce the size of our standing armed forces if we stop policing the world. The logic of that positon is obvious, don't you think?

Fred's Late Entry
Fred Thompson had to wait until Sept. 6 to enter the race because if he had entered too soon, he and all of the other actors on his TV show would have had their residuals cut off. From now on, you won't be seeing any re-runs of any show he has been seen in. If any of his movies are shown on national TV, then ALL of the other folks running for office would have to be given equal time. The studios don't want to have to pay for that.

Position
Fred could position as a small government type but his record is not one of small government. Fred's main appeal is his image and personality cult following. Fred sell's the sizzle. Sizzle is nice but most of us want substance.

Fred has a following and he is a top tier candidate. Now the fun begins. Over the next 4 months the baloney will sizzle away and we will see if Fred is really President material.

for Warren Small
Warren Small writes: "*Letting 50 states decide individually most matters relating to "social conservatism", so we can find out what works and doesn't by comparative testing."

Hey, for a guy like you who prides himself on being a staunch right-winger, you just lost your right-wing audience right there, baby!

Social conservatives don't want 50 states to "decide individually," and they don't care whether social conservative policies "work" by objective measures. What they want is spelled out right there in Holy Scripture and as far as they are concerned, it should be just as mandatory for Vermont or Massachusetts or California as it should be for Mississippi or Idaho.

The Bible doesn't come with appendices that tailor it for different states of the Union. It isn't even tailored for different planets in the Milky Way Galaxy. It's the Universal Truth of All and even the Klingons and the Vulcans and the Wookies have to live by it, as far as they are concerned. Or else, we'll lead a military expedition to disarm them and introduce them to Western style democracy and Christian values.

Social conservatives stopped believing in limited government and federalism a long time ago. They think the Bible trumps both.

How long can you run?
By the time elections get here a lot of people will feel like they, yhemselves have run for an office. Noone will care who wins, lets just get it over with. Of course the media will not have to work. All the work is done for them for so many long months. I will now pay attention to the race as I have not experienced burn-out listening to all the easy questions/ pat answer sound bites that were supposed to be debates. "My hair is more pretty than the others." "I am strong, I am angry, I am woman." " I am black enough, honkey." Real stuff to get the presidency, I`m sure.

fred
is my choice. duncan hunter is my first choice, but i don't think he will win. so fred, i think, will be the closest to my point of view. there are no dems running who i would even consider. they are all lacking in common sense.

Is it me
or are the Ron Paul drone starting to sound the same?

Insightful Truth, WE ARE HUMAN and thus we err. Fred screwed the pooch there and acknowledged it. Thus, AS HUMANS, we forgive him.

You'd have us vote for a numbskull isolationist who would have us all laying about toking it up with a standing army the size of Canada trying to protect us.

I'll pass on Ron Paul since I missed the 1920's and we're a little further down the road since then the dreadnaught days.

Couple of questions
Is it ok to start the 2012 presidential elections yet?
Who says when a candidate enters the race?
Do I really have to watch 2 full years of BS to make a choice?
I dont know if I prefer Fred or not but he does communicate well.
Persona is a big reason people vote for President else why a Bill Clintion?
I hope I am right because Hillary's stinks
In any case so Fred came in late and he didnt deem to kotow to the republican hierarchy so what! Probably just what we need. They havent done very well lately anyway. Ron Paul may have a FEW good points to make (not about the war) but his persona needs a straight jacket. SO we have several months lets listen, lets let the candidates hear us. Then we see if they talk the talk. Then pray to god that they can walk the walk.

I still don't get it, Fredheads
Very few Fredheads give concrete reasons why they support him. How about no more "go Fred Go" and get to the real issues?

Yesterday on Hannity Fred was still unable to answer even the most basic question about a policy, a vision, or a direction. He just said he still has a long way to go. Gee, you would think after 6 months he might have been thinking about something - anything!

And he kept repeating "that's between me and the American people." You get the feeling he is going to run his campaign as nothing more than a popularity contest, using his Arthur Branch alter-ego.

I fail to see how anyone would want a do nothing president. Yes, I know we have too much government control, but the times we are seem to call for a man with tremendous energy and focus. The argument about his timetable should be over - it doesn't matter now. It's time for us to see if Fred is more capable than the rest. If it is true that he only plans a couple campaign stops per day, that tells me a lot.

I honestly think Fred thinks he can win without money, a ground organization, and without being specific on his ideas. He thinks he can win by personality alone. Time will tell, but that is a risky strategy - and dare I say, lazy.


8 to 15%
Right now it's "secure the base" time. As we near the election the politicians will be in "cater to the undecideds" mode.

They know how the dems will vote- ditto for the repubs. Campaigns are aimed at those 8 to 15% undecided.

So why we spend so much time worrying about what a politician says at campaign time I couldn't say.
We need to look to their past. And that is something we must do ourselves the media wont be giving us any trustworthy data on that subject.

TownHall sounds like routine America
If you listen to the comments of citizens after any of these televised debates, you will hear things like, "He comes across as the most sincere," or "he sounds very dedicated to this issue." THAT is how most Americans, Democrats and Republicans, make up their minds about who to vote for. A preference based on the surface.

Many of the TH comments sound exactly like that, too. For my part, I don't care how fast or slowly someone joined the race or about how fast or slowly he appears to be campaigning. I don't care what his wife looks like. I don't care if he doesn't exhibit fire in the belly.

I DO want a candidate who comes as close as possible to mirroring the positions that I embrace on a number of issues -- namely immigration, WOT, taxes and national security of our borders. I want someone who can LEAD. Most importantly, I want a candidate who is viciously and insanely patriotic and thinks of America first, last and always -- UNLIKE the majority of what fills Washington right now. What he looks like, what he sounds like and how fast he runs doesn't matter to me.

Fred
Did Fred wait too long or did the bafoons already in the race start way too early?

At best Fred is second choice
Fred Thompson was one of the original sponsors of McCain-Finegold. So much for Fred's respect for The Constitution. I want the next president to view The U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land, not as a supreme suggestion.

Demean him all you want, Ron Paul is the only candidate from either of the major parties who truly supports and defends The Constitution of the United States. I have spent most of my adult life proclaiming the beauty of the ideals of the American experiment. I see no benefit to throwing my vote away, on a candidate that sees the vision of The Framers as inconvenient to their personal quest for power.

GO
FRED GO!
He is the best one in the race.
I mean--look at hillarinsky-good grief!

FRED
It seemes that everyone in DC. is so wrapped up with who is going to be the first woman or black president that they have forgotten what is at stake. i dont understand why we even have political parties. there should be ONE party, THE AMERICAN PARTY. Every candidate should have the welfare and safety of All American in mind. No descrimination. Weather anyone likes it or not God and The Christians who know that He is real have made this country what it is. take Him out of this country and we also loose His protection. This country WILL FALL without Him. Time and time again rulers of nations came to power in the Bible, how they worshiped God determined the wealth and well being of that nation. with Him they had His security, without Him they soon fell. im not a college educted man but i can read and i can see whats going on in this country and the world is exactly what the Bible predicted thousands of years ago. How can it be unless God is in control like He says? It seems that FRED understands this fact as all Christians do. IF GOD IS FOR YOU, WHO CAN BE AGAINST YOU?

Don't you Ron Paul guys know that you
are starting to sound like Democrats?

William J. Bryan at the Democrat Convention – “You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.

Tampa Dave
That is a key point that I make about Fred in my blog article on him today. He is NOT A CAREER politician and unlike Hitlary, he has never toured the USSR!

He has also MADE something of himself OUTSIDE of the Beltway, something that NONE of the libstains have done. Indeed, Hitlary rode Bubba coattails and Obama is riding the coattails of Oprah, etc.

Sam
What is your suggestion to stop the sky from falling, Sam? Hillary? Ron Paul? Throw our hands up in total despair?

Porch Rockin' Whittlers
"Meanwhile Thompson seems content to sit on his porch whittling a piece of wood with his pocketknife while offering pearls of wisdom out of an old Bartles & Jaymes commercial."

You know, you big city boy media types need to quit this because regular folks are catching on. Fred Thompson didn't meet the media's deadline for getting into the presidential race. Fred Thompson had the audacity to thumb his nose at the media's extensions, too. We all note your hissy fits over this. But this covert way of linking a Southern accent to laziness AKA "no fire in the belly" is about as transparent as my using "hissy fit" to covertly imply you big city media types are all a bunch of wimps.

answering Jonah G.
I think I may have seen "Law and Order" 2 or 3 times, with a total of 2 minutes of "Arthur Branch". Ironically, my enthusiasm for Fred comes from reading his Townhall blogs. They display not only a true conservatism, but a real depth of knowledge and understanding of the history and rationale and experience of the American experiment in the context of a genuine unerstanding of human nature and natural law. (As a full-time professor myself, I appreciate that.)

And he's a straight shooter: never slick or evasive. When he doesn't want to answer an interviewer's question, he says he doesn't want to answer it and why. Contrast that with almost everybody else's (Rep or Dem) technique of turning the question into their own talking points.

All along, he has taken unequivocal positions on all the key issues, from abortion to immigration to the war to the 2nd amendment (along the way, educating the public on otherwise obscure issues or aspects of foreign and domestic policy).

And as if that weren't enough, his lack of political ambition is such a welcome change. Well, not really a change, since that was (and is) still one of the positives of Pres. Bush, but a big difference from the rest of the pack.

America needs a President who is faith-driven; not ego-driven. Is he another Ronald Reagan? Heck, I think times are tougher than the 80's: We don't need a Ronald Reagan, we need an Abraham Lincoln!

Does Fred measure up? I pray that he does, and I'll bet he prays so too.

Still don't get it?

Fred is the Key to a Hillary Defeat
Remember, Fred had to be urged to run. Unlike the other folks, Fred did not actively pursue this job since time immemorial.

As Republicans and conservatives, we need to rally around someone - anyone - who can defeat the Clinton Machine. Hillary scares the heck out of me. She will raise all taxes, re-distribute the income of the upper middle class, and institute social engineering like you've never seen before. PC police will dominate our culture. Daily Kos run wild....

Fred may be the cure. I hope so.

Vic
Swoop by my blog brother. Got a hot one posted.

Winability
In this election year- I'll be choosing a candidate because I think he actually has a chance to win. That man is Thompson.

I'd be happy with many of the top candidates and will mostly be voting to keep out whatever corrupt reprobate the democrats will be fielding this time.
And finally, for all of their promises and good intentions, how much of what these candidates intend can realistically be accomplished?


Anne
point well taken.

anne
"Must be the paulists are really nervous about Thompson since they go after him EVERY chance they get. Although I'm not sure why... because during the first Republican debate, as Goldberg said, ronniepaul, 'barreled past conservatism to swampy territory [way] outside the borders of common sense.'"

Well, there you go ignoring half what Goldberg said, inflating the other half, and conflating isolationism and noninterventionism again.

The reason Ron Paul supporters "go after" Fred is Fred is the next closest candidate to a conservative with his hat in the ring.

As Goldberg put it, "trimming the responsibilities of government to a few important and constitutional functions would also constitute real reform. Right now, the only bandwagon for a message even remotely like that is the Ron Paul campaign...."

Still, even as a Ron Paul supporter, I like you, but for different reasons--I disagree that with him on leaving Iraq--I agree with the remainder of Goldberg's comment, "unfortunately, that bandwagon has no brakes."

So, I'll look closer now at Fred, try and see just how conservative he is and how much he wants to trim "the responsibilities of government to a few important and constitutional functions."

Slide rules?
Jonah says "Romney wants to bring the slide rules and PowerPoint projectors". Who told Jonah about slide rules? They became obsolete before he got out of kindergarten. (I still have one of mine by the way)

Does everyone else get the impression that Jonah supports RINO Rudy?

And Gunny….or we going to be doing more Shrillary pics today?

Hindsight is 20/20
and although I personally wouldn't mind if our country was "an island in the sun", I guess isolationism wouldn't be cool. Yeah, Iraq's a mess and I wish we had done things differently, like gone ahead and taken care of old Saddam back in the 90s, but we didn't. I wish George the younger had had an opportunity to have a "normal" presidency just so we could have seen how that turned out, but he didn't. I really wish the 9/11 massacre hadn't happened, along with the numerous preceding terroristic acts pepetrated against our country, but they did. I don't agree with Ron Paul that we, the U.S., are the cause of it all. This great country, flawed as it is, has done way more good for the planet than bad, and yet, we are reviled far more than praised, even by those who have benefited by our largesse. Why is that? I'll let the psychologists, sociologists, and experts here on TH decide that.

I do think one thing, tho, and that is this; we had better elect someone who is strong-minded and willing to keep this country safe in the real sense of the word. Borders must be protected, trade imbalances corrected, and power projected (damn, that's pretty good!).

Pianogirl, name calling is the way things are today, sadly. But, some doofusses deserve it, like the bigoted Small.

Everyone have a nice Saturday. I have to go play old duffer softball.

CJ

My Man Jones
Agreed. Fred is working SMARTER NOT HARDER and ANY politician who is all about LESS legislation is the one for me. Also, I think that Fred KNOWS where HIS veto pen is, unlike Jorge Bush!

ALL
Not to hijack the thread but check my blog for the Dhimmicrat's reaction to Osama's latest video.

Not to hijack the thread
... and focus it on Ron Paul, but until the presidential debates began I had a favorable impression of Paul. That may be because I had never really seen him or heard him. His advocates presented his best side. But to expereince the man in full is another story.

There is a companion article on Townhall by Paul Driessen on Global Warming http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PaulDriessen/2007/09/08/global_warming_insanity . It begins with:

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority,” Marcus Aurelius opined, “but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” An even worse fate would be to end up in minority status and an asylum. Recent developments suggest that this might become the destiny of climate change alarmists.

I suggest that Ron Paul's supporters think long and hard to avoid becoming a minority in an asylum.

Fred, the winner
All of the criticisms of Fred from his saying shut up to his wife to his loafers are forgotten.

The buck starts here. Fred has saved millions while getting millions worth of publicity. Can a lazy dummy do that? I hope he is laid back. It is better for reasons space won't allow. It is the reason Regan lived so long.

Don't ever think an actor can hide thir real personality for years. The nuances and body language and intensity of speech all spell what is underneath. Americans see the real Fred and like him a helluva lot better than the rest of the "good guy gang". Right now it is a three person race, and that is all it will ever be.
Hillary, Rudy and Fred.

He will beat'em.
Don Jones
MyManFred.com

I'm a bit underwhelmed.
I agree with Thompson on the 2nd Amendment(I watched a speech he gave on television). It does mean the right of individual citizens, not militias, to own firearms. And he does not hyperventilate, slobber in hysteria, at the global warming trough concerning Earth's doom. I'm sure he's for lower taxes(don't all GOPERS say that?), and less government intrusion. Standard issue GOPER material. And all to his credit.

BUT, Fred Thompson's interview by Brian Williams, I think it was Brian, recently left me with the conclusion he "apes" the Bush/neocon line on Iraq. I was hoping for some innovation, not rehash of failed policies. He finally commented about Iraq, and had the breathtaking audacity and scope to serve up stale leftovers.

Very disappointing.

I agree with some that we can't just pull out of Iraq tomorrow. As I believe Mike Huckabee said recently about Iraq: "we broke it, and we can't leave until we fix it", or words to that effect.

But that still does not excuse the imbecilic thought processes and assumptions that gave rise to the invasion in the first place.

Yes, we have now incurred an obligation, a responsbility, to ourselves, as much as to the Iraqis, not to prematurely leave an Iraq that would become a cauldron for Islamic extremism.

But we should never have acted in such a way as to be placed in this predicament in the first place.

Wow
Some other forums have bylaws that forbid "name-calling." I guess Townhall isn't one of them, as it seems to be the MO of most who dislike Ron Paul as well as the columnists themselves. Ad hominem is a tiresome, overused, and telling form of debate.

Fred Thompson IS a member of the elitist, globalist, America last CFR. ANYONE belonging to that organization should be feared. Go ahead and dismiss the fact, and call Ron Paul and his supporters names, but do so at the peril of our once-great nation and our liberties.

Ron Paul is Hope for America.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

Hey Chopper John... :-)
Good Morning to you too! Good to see ya again.

You're right about Thompson. I said months and months ago, IF and when Fred entered the race, it would be a whole new race, and only then would it be "Game ON!"

Warning: Ignore tca.. He's an idiot!
.

Strolling?
Such things are inane comments when put up against the threats we face.

Fred's an adult. We need an adult as President.

You serious people
need to shake the dust loose a little bit. The presidential campaign has not started yet. The so-called debates have simply been fluff to satisfy the mighty media. Frankly, I think Thompson has been the only one mature enough not to be sucked in to "look at me" garbage thus far.

I told some of the serious, mature Paul supporters that I would certainly support him if he was the candidate against the trash from the democrat side. I must say, however, that squirrels suchas the couple we've had here this AM would make that decision tough. But, then again, I really don't pay that much attention to them. I don't care for Small's bigotry tho'.

Good morning, Anne.

hogrider: You make excellent points!

Thompson... wait to see what is needed in a given circumstance "rather than jump right in with a know it all attitude ..."

And, Thompson doesn't appear to be a "power hungry" politician.

You don't suppose that too many people confuse "fire in the belly" with being "power hungry" do you?



I luv the accusations and 2nd guessing

about Thompson!!

Who REALLY knows exactly why Thompson didn't formally enter the race until now? And who says Sept. 07 is too late?

It could be, among other reasons, contractual issues with whatever network aired the show he was on.

I could also be that Thompson was testing the political waters to be sure his candidacy would actually be a viable candidacy (unlike some others who have already wasted $Millions for nothing.)

And who cares? It doesn't matter... not really!

How ridiculous to enter a race that already has clear front runners? (Biden and Kucinich come to mind on the demo side, and of course libertarian ronniepaul comes to mind on the Republican side.) What a waste of time and money!!

Gee, Thompson sounds like a fiscal Conservative already! :-)

It might just be that Thompson took his time to be sure that his candidacy would be a viable, worthwhile candidacy, that would make a difference.

Ummm, a well thought out decision to run for POTUS? Sounds like a breath of fresh air in this presidential race. Could be that Thompson is really onto something...

Must be the paulists are really nervous about Thompson since they go after him EVERY chance they get. Although I'm not sure why... because during the first Republican debate, as Goldberg said, ronniepaul, "barreled past conservatism to swampy territory [way] outside the borders of common sense."







And your problem is...?
Mary Matalin summarized the Thompson approach to government very nicely on the Glenn Beck show the night before last:

1. Is this a proper function of government?
2. If it is, for what level of government?
3. What will it actually do?

If this is really Thompson's approach, then, coupled with his preference for federalism and the private sector, he could well be a better president than Reagan was.

Thanks to our horrific government-run schools, most Americans don't remember the brilliant successes of the two LEAST active presidents in our history: Grover Cleveland and Calvin Coolidge. Each made one mistake: Cleveland allowed the Army to be used against the Pullman strike; Coolidge permitted the Federal Reserve Bank to inflate the dollar by more than 7% per year. But in both cases, they restrained Washington very effectively, and the public loved them for it.

May Fred Dalton Thompson be our next Cleveland!

Warren Small (minded)
Change your handle to: racistkook

There they go again...
" Right now, the only bandwagon for a message even remotely like that is the Ron Paul campaign, and unfortunately, that bandwagon has no brakes. It long ago barreled past conservatism to swampy territory outside the borders of common sense."

Comments like these, and Rudi's smart-aleck remarks about Paul, to his worshipper Sean Hannity, after the debate, only makes me want to vote for Paul, who actually backs up what he says with facts, rather than taking the liberal road, and insult, without any thing to base it on. I don't dislike Fred, but, using this method of campagining don't work. Sorry.

judgedredd1
Yeah, this is more YOUR speed. Probably get you all hot and bothered.

http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/images/Hillary%20Clinton.jpg

hogrider
Check my blog (click on my handle) for an article on WHY AMERICA needs Fred at the helm, not some commie-elitist like Her Thighness or The Breck Girl.

Outside the beltway
We need someone from outside the beltway who can communicate with people. We need a president that people will trust who can push the citizens of America to do the right thing. And we need someone with conservative values - true conservative values.

I think Fred is that man.

Well now,
it all depends what you want in a chief executive.
Option 1: someone who is running around like a chicken with its head cut off, micromanaging this, examining that, organizing this, reorganizing that.
Option 2: Someone who delegates on the little things, sits back, then when the underlings come to him for the big questions, he pulls out his whittle stick, gives it a couple shaves, spits in the spitoon and says "Well now, this is what George Washington did in a similar situation.."

Fred Thompson...
strikes me as a man who will wait to see what is needed in a given circumstance and then apply that very thing, rather than jump right in with a know it all attitude as most politicians are wont to do.


As for me, I'm glad he entered the race. All the rest of the candidates on both sides of the wall seem more than a little power hungry, particularly on the dems side.

I was an early supporter...
...of Freds,but he has entirely dropped off my radar now.His indicsiveness and manipulation of the news media has convinced me that he is really an empty suit and lazy to boot.Surely,we can do better than this.

And incidently,Jonah has expressed my thoughts on Paul Ron exactly,although I think he would have been a good candidate in 1789.A Reagan or Goldwater he is not!

Zionist neocons?????
Now I know why I have a hard time supporting Ron Paul: he's backed by bigots like Warren!

Compared to whom?
There are lots of doubts about Fred, and at this point i haven't chosen any primary candidate. Fred might even be a RINO. But if he is the candidate, i'll vote for him. Better an enigma than B Hussein O, or Hillary, whose political philosophies are all too well known.

I like Fred But not For President
Fred is a good guy and a good actor. He waited to see what the people want, So he will not be called a flip-flop. And all the guess work is eliminated. But that does not convince me that he will follow through. His past record is not that great in politics or as a lobbyist.

I believe he is a good guy, but not a good organizer or a leader as he is seen in his acting roll. All his lines are thought out way before. All of the conditions and situations are hypothetical. If he had been governor like Reagan and Romney that would be more credible.

Think of who you do not want, as well because if another will do better and Fred falls short on votes, save your vote for your next best and not spoil your hopes.

Lazy?
I'd actually would like Fred very much if he was too lazy to sign anything. Just pocket veto every piece of government expanding legislation that comes his way (which is about 99% of it these days) and that's about all I'd ask for in a President.

Sadly, I doubt if he's *that* lazy.

Good Call
I know a little, but not alot, about Fred Thompsons politics. The fact that he stuck to his guns and waited to enter the race now (Sept) is something I can respect.

This campaign season began WAY too early.

My guess is that most voters miss the old days when presidential campaigns were shorter. Fred may have rightly gauged the pulse of the people on this one. Kinda reminds me of another actor turned politician.

Well, I'll be the first so far, then
I like Fred, I'll vote for him, and I kicked 100 bucks into his campaign the other day.

I'll also volunteer my time, as I told the person on the phone when I made my donation.

A for you CFR conspiracy whack jobs, you need to learn a new tune. Ron Paul ain't got a chance in hell of going anywhere, and you guys are getting tiresome beyond belief.


WOW!
What a nice picture of Fred. Looks like a creature from "Dawn of the Dead".

Oh, my gosh
an unflattering comment about Ron Paul. Now you gonna get it!
FDT - have little to nothing to say. Except he was going to 'announce' on July 4, then Sept 1, then snubbed the debate on FoxNews. Says about all I want to hear.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.