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
Friday, September 07, 2007
Kathleen Parker :: Townhall.com Columnist
Fred Thompson's "mistake"
by Kathleen Parker
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



In a stunning move that caught no one by surprise, Fred Thompson announced that ... he's ... running ... for ... president.

Time to step up to the plate, he said.

And everybody hit their snooze buttons.

That Thompson is running for the highest office was a foregone anti-climax after months of testing, consulting, pondering, considering and, most important, letting the other candidates spend their money and exhaust Americans' interest with endless debates in which little new is said or learned.

The debates have become so boilerplate, in fact, that Thompson himself became one of the topics at Wednesday's forum in New Hampshire. Where was Fred?

Fred was chatting it up with Jay Leno on "The Tonight Show" set, where he made his formal announcement. The other Republican candidates, doubtless weary from the previous 200 debates, took turns taking shots at Thompson.

Rudy Giuliani got off the best line, saying that he likes Thompson and thinks he's done a "pretty good job of playing my part on 'Law & Order.' I personally prefer the real thing."

The unflappable Thompson was in character when Leno asked him what he thought of the criticism. "It's a lot more difficult to get on 'The Tonight Show' than it is to get into a presidential debate," he deadpanned.

Despite criticism that Thompson played the Hollywood card by going on Leno's show, he was able to make some serious points about Iraq (stay until the country is stable), and complete his thoughts in paragraphs without interruption.

On important matters, Thompson is as serious as the DA he plays on television. And just as direct, as when he described Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as "a fellow who is not put together well upstairs running the country." As president, Thompson might have to be more diplomatic, but such frank talk is refreshing when most public figures are measuring their words with espresso spoons.

Thompson prompted applause when he answered Leno's question about why the U.S. isn't more popular with other countries. "What are we doing wrong?" Leno asked.

Powerful countries tend to attract envy and resentment, Thompson began. That's the price of being the biggest, strongest nation in the world. A 6-foot-6 man like Thompson might know something about that. But then he shifted focus from what we've done wrong to what we've done right:

"Our people have shed more blood for the liberty and freedom of other peoples ... than all the other countries put together. (Applause.) And I don't feel any need to apologize for the United States of America."

There's still much to know about this latest addition to the White House race, but as first impressions go, Thompson has at least two things going for him: He's utterly lacking in hubris -- or so it seems -- and he can communicate. If presidents are elected in reaction to the previous officeholder, that's a strong hand.

It is also impossible to picture Thompson as a cheerleader.

Whether he can get nominated is another question, but he already holds the No. 2 slot in the polls behind Giuliani. On the Internet, Thompson's Web site (ImWithFred) had the most unique visitors in July among the Republican candidates, according to a new Nielsen report. Barack Obama leads all the candidates in Web traffic.

Whatever happens next, Thompson at least gave commentators something new to talk about. Was it a mistake to go on Leno instead of the debate, they wondered? And, did he sign on too late, they speculated? Is he a team player?

Thompson must have chuckled all the way to Iowa. Too late for what? Most Americans still don't know who's running and don't share the punditry's obsession with quantifying who's up and who's down every 24-hour cycle. If they're watching television, they're more likely watching Leno, who averaged 5.9 million viewers in 2006, instead of the presidential debates, which tend to draw between 1 million and 2 million viewers, according to Variety.

By setting himself apart from the gaggle and having a one-on-one chat with 6 million Americans, Thompson messed up the political ecosystem. In a single well-timed appearance, he made up for a late start and got exposure and buzz. And it didn't cost him a dime.

Some mistake.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kathleen Parker is a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Kathleen Parker's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Fred will win because
The American people know they can trust him. On top of that he's definitely more conservative than most of the other Republican cnadidates combined, which is why he's already so high in the polls.
Not that I trust polls since it's well known that the liberal MSM doctors their polls to get the results they want.
Finally, the MSM has already started attacking him, almost as much as the RonniePaul fanatics are, and looking for flaws to exploit so they're dredging up the usual garbage that's totally irrelavent.

FRED '08

Fred will win because
The American people know they can trust him. On top of that he's definitely more conservative than most of the other Republican cnadidates combined, which is why he's already so high in the polls.
Not that I trust polls since it's well known that the liberal MSM doctors their polls to get the results they want.
Finally, the MSM has already started attacking him, almost as much as the RonniePaul fanatics are, and looking for flaws to exploit so they're dredging up the usual garbage that's totally irrelavent.

FRED '08

VETS Pick Fred as their man
Fred has made an impression on US Military Veterans. They are signing up in droves to support him at: http://Vets4Fred.net

Thompson is the man!
He shines as a candidate since the Democrats have wasted their appearnces by being over presented -- and the Republican field has records that are burdened by "experience."

As surelt as Climton's negatives bring her down -- Thompson's positives will sustain him.

As the song said, "I like Ike because he is good on a mike", Thompson's oral and stage presence is convicting.

Thompson and Bush
1) "Ahmadinejad is not well put-together upstairs" (ie Ahmadinejad is crazy) goes on the same list as calling people "The Axis of Evil"---it makes a blustering, swaggering statement that plays to the base but does minus-100% for international diplomacy. After seven years of a show-offy cowboy who scorns thought while alienating the whole world, this country can't afford another like Bush.

2) Add to that Thompson's disdain for playing by the rules. While other Republican candidates declared, he played coy. While others went public, he stayed private. While others debated, he stuck his finger in their eyes and went on Jay Leno. All of this reminds me of Bush's constant putting himself above the law, keeping everything secret, and disrespecting the American people.

Sounds to me as if people who like the way Bush has governed would love Fred Thompson.

silly lilly
as usual, you just open mouth and insert foot
1 fred didnt announce until after labor day because be cause traditionally, candidates didnt announce their run until after labor day
2 as fred said- there will be 2 world series played before the next election
fred has just let all the others waste all their resources when no one is really paying attention anyway
sept. thru feb. of this year is Traditionally the time where candidates make themselves known and stump from state to state making their positions on issues knowm
fred's doing it like all the past candidates have done for over 200 years
besides what do you care, your a lib and already have voted in the hildabeast

So far, I like Thompson
I like him, in part beause he does not go along with the politial process. I think the devatesa re a a wate of time. The winner of htese debates is not the man with the best idea, but the slickest improvisitory orator. I think it is stupid for the moderator to ask questions about what one candidate thinks of another, It counds like so much school-yard gossip. Let a man, declare his position with dignity and clarity. Let him articulte the grand principles that guide his thinking, not the details of a plan for this or that which must necessarily change as circumstances change.

I would be attracted to any candidate that would say, "I'll be glad to participate in two debates which deal specifically with the issues that confront our country, but no more. I will not be made subject to the foolish questions of those whose onyl hope is to stir up some controversy to grab ratings. All my position papers will be available on the internet. If someone has a question, they can post it on the internet at our site, and we will try to answer it. I will not attack these other men who are running against me: they are good men. I will let them express their views and the voters can compare them with mine. Not will I ever stoop to digging up matters of the past that have no bearing on the fitness of any of my oponents to serve. Everyone has skeletons in their closet, and we do well to leave them there. The indiscretions of youth are not suitable fodder for political dicourse."

So far, I like Thompson 2

"My campaign and presidency will be an attenpt to grow the diginity that is the dream of America: a place where decency, justice and nearly boundless opportunity await those who have the fortitude to work. I so firmly believe in the American way that I will defend it against all enemies domestic and foreign, and will not be disuaded in that simply becasue there are mistakes and falls along the way. God has blessed this nation, and I make no apoplogy for saying that. As the writer of our national anthem penned, "Praise the Power that made and preserved us a nation." But that blessing brings with it great responsibilities. We must preserve ourselves, sometimes in brutal military conflict, so that this brilliant light of freedom does not go out. We must be ready to help those nations that re struggling to grow up from the infantile forms of government made up of dictators and other tyrants.

While we acknowledge that each man has a right to lead his life as he chooses, so long as it does not impinge on the rights of others, we muct not cave in to the forces of perversion that would make us give legal approval to perversion. We may tolerate perversion, but we must never approve of it by enshrine its dignity in law.


So far, I like Thompson 3
We must dispense with the idea that government knows best. There are a few things that are best done under the collective wisdom and power of governmental intitutions. But the vast majority of human life is best conducted by the millions of our citizens making individual choices.

We simply must convince the world that we do beleive in ourselves and will accept no challenge to our sovereignty. We receive many immigrants into our border; but it must be acknowledged by all that we reserve the right to determine the number which shall be allowed in, and the manner by which they shall be approved. Many mistakes have been made on this issue; but we must begin now to address the problem in a way that restores integrity to our borders, and deals justly and compassionatly with those who have taken advantage of our lack of immigration enforcement.

Our country allows the most digruntled citizen to express his disatisfaction with the US. But we must not allow their childish rantings to dissuade us from being the strongest and best country that the world has ever seen.

Kathleen, good article!
I thought from the title, you were going to join the pundants in making too big of a deal out of his timing and choice of venues. But you pointed out correctly, IMHO, that he was simply being smarter than most by using a venue where he was not limited to 2-3 minutes to explain a position.

Kathleen, good article!
I thought from the title, you were going to join the pundants in making too big of a deal out of his timing and choice of venues. But you pointed out correctly, IMHO, that he was simply being smarter than most by using a venue where he was not limited to 2-3 minutes to explain a position.

Fred's line...
Fred's line: "Our people have shed more blood for the liberty and freedom of other peoples ... than all the other countries put together. And I don't feel any need to apologize for the United States of America."

Sounds very familiar.

Duncan Hunter - July 9, 2007:
"This country has lost 619 thousand Americans on the battlefields around the world in the last 100 years making the world safe."

Great words to live by:

Ronald Reagan: “There is no limit to what a man can do or where he can go if he doesn’t mind who gets the credit.”

Ron Paul leads in web traffic.
The Nielsen ratings seem to omit Dr. Ron Paul, who leads the pack by a huge margin in web traffic. Here's proof, dated September 6, 2007:

http://www.clickz.com/

Fred's perceived "slowness" is only exacerbated by his late entry into the race, and that slow, good old boy southern drawl sure doesn't help any. Maybe he could find a good acting coach who can help him work on his presidential image.

Ron Paul leads in web traffic.
The Nielsen ratings seem to omit Dr. Ron Paul, who leads the pack by a huge margin in web traffic. Here's proof, dated September 6, 2007:

http://www.clickz.com/

Fred's perceived "slowness" is only exacerbated by his late entry into the race, and that slow, good old boy southern drawl sure doesn't help any. Maybe he could find a good acting coach who can help him work on his presidential image.


Lilly & The Clueless Left
"The Axis of Evil"---it makes a blustering, swaggering statement that plays to the base but does minus-100% for international diplomacy. After seven years of a show-offy cowboy who scorns thought while alienating the whole world, this country can't afford another like Bush. (End Lilly Quote.)

Proof you people don't have a clue, besides that idiot Obama saying he'd meet with our enemies. Diplomacy and popularity have nothing do to with each other. How do you being diplomatic negotiations with someone who's starting point is "You're dead"? The Axis of Evil statement was well said too - it served notice on these hostile nations that we know who they are and what they're up to. It was an absolute truth that made France mad, they, like you need to face the truth and practice your coping skills.

my 2 cents
Let's remember that it is about 5 months until the primaries

Let's remember that we political junkies are a very small minority - on both sides. While we have been happily screaming yelling calling each other names, and other fun activities, John and Joan Q. average voter have been going about their daily business happily ignoring us.

And let's remember that THEIR votes are just as valid as ours.

So let's stay cool.

Fred was smart in delaying his entrance - get as much free ink as you can. As for his description of whacko-lad of Iran - the dude has denied the holocaust and called for wiping Israel off the map with nukes, among other things, so perhaps he has a screw or two loose. How many leaders from over there have compared our president to Hitler, how many pictures have you all seen of people over there burning OUR flag?

"Whatever happens next Thompson at least gave cmmentator something new to talk about."

True. And it's STILL 5 months until the primaries.

Let's stay cool.

Lilly & The Clueless Left
"The Axis of Evil"---it makes a blustering, swaggering statement that plays to the base but does minus-100% for international diplomacy. After seven years of a show-offy cowboy who scorns thought while alienating the whole world, this country can't afford another like Bush. (End Lilly Quote.)

Proof you people don't have a clue, besides that idiot Obama saying he'd meet with our enemies. Diplomacy and popularity have nothing do to with each other. How do you begin diplomatic negotiations with someone who's starting point is "You're dead"? The Axis of Evil statement was well said too - it served notice on these hostile nations that we know who they are and what they're up to. It was an absolute truth that made France mad, they, like you need to face the truth and practice your coping skills.

question
Does anyone know what became of Loyal Democrat?

ReaganRepublican writes:
" How do you being diplomatic negotiations with someone who's starting point is "You're dead"?"

No kidding.

for lilly
Lilly writes: "it makes a blustering, swaggering statement that plays to the base but does minus-100% for international diplomacy."

Oh, give me a break.

Have you criticized Ahmedinijad for his own "swaggering" statements in which he repeatedly called for Israel's disappearance?

Or Chavez's "swaggering" statements in which he reviled President Bush in language so filthy that even liberal congressman Charles Rangel told him to shut up?

America has taken it on the chin from international gangsters for far too long, going back to Khruschev's threat at the U.N. that "We will bury you." We buried him instead.

I am all for diplomacy when dealing with civilized peoples and nations.

But you don't have to be "diplomatic" when someone sends you a death threat.

I remember liberals like you got absolutely hysterical when President Reagan called the USSR an "evil empire." And I have waited decades, in vain, for you liberals to finally ADMIT he was right about that.

Fred Thompson is just another RINO
look at his record. He's almost a carboncopy of McCain. Do you really want a lobbyist who's been cuddled up with the hollywood left for the last several years in the White House? Why do we want a person who doesn't see an America with no dependance on international oil? Why would we want a person who says illegal immigration is an "impossible situation to deal with". Someone against gun control "generally"? What does generally against gun control mean? I'm against it in general but specifically I'm for it? Someone who things Roe V Wade was "bad law" not a bad court decision. There is no law called "Roe V Wade".

Just reading his quotes makes me even more convienced he's a joke. http://www.anotherronaldreagan.com/Thompson_President_issues.html

You want someone that will restore the greatness America once had look at Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, John Cox, or Ron Paul. If you're looking at Thompson, Rudy, McCain, or Romney because the media keeps telling you they can win ask yourself why you are trusting a media that lies to you constantly and hates your country.

for Sgt Relic
Sgt Relic writes: "After 9 months of campaigning the other candidates were not running neck and neck with Rudy. Fred was!"

No.

"Fred" is only running second to Rudy as a placeholder for "None of the Above." They would be equally supportive of any other dyed-in-the-wool conservative.

Republican rank-and-file conservatives are NOT supporting Fred because they agree with his positions--most of them don't yet even know his positions. They're supporting him by default only because they do not like Rudy or Romney or McCain, the other front-runners. To them, Fred is "I'm not Rudy McRomney."

And that's one of the BIG reasons why Thompson is NOT like Reagan after all. I remember the 1980 campaign. The Republican rank-and-file didn't go for Reagan just because they disdained the other candidates like Bush and Baker and Connally. Reagan had led the conservative movement in America since the 1960s and they specifically wanted HIM.

Thompson has not.

Fred Thompson
I think that Fred Thompson's announcement on the recent Jay Leno Show was a smart political maneuver. So far, I have not witnessed Thompson saying or doing anything stupid: a good start for any politician, Republican or Democrat!

Uncle Max
I've saw Loyal Democrat around the other day, but it seems he has been around less recently. Might be a busy time of year for him or something.

no fear
my personal favorite so far is thompson. he's from my part of the world, he speaks my language. second, giuliani. i think he's a tough nut. (gingrinch is probably the smartest of them all but sadly, thanx to the msm, unelectable) but whoever the candidate is (as we say in holly springs, alabama) they best understand that they're gonna be running against clinton and her machine. and it's gonna get dirty.

obama? lightweight. edwards? he doesn't have the gonads to be her intern. the clintonistas will eat these guys for brunch. this is akin to usc playing popcorn u. the week before the big game with notre dame. pete carroll can talk all he wants but they're prepping for the irish. ditto clinton. she's in cruise control (dixie dregs. damn good tune!) now all the while digging on potential republicans. (thompson, giuliani, romney) october surprise??? try the surprise of the week!

i predict this will be the dirtiest presidential campaign in our nation's history. whoever the repub. candidate is, he'd better not be afraid to play in the mud.

Too early
Isn't it too early to declare that Thompson's move of entering this late was the right thing to do? Only time will tell. We'll see whether he can raise the necessary cash in a relatively short period of time, and whether his lack of ground organization in each state really matters.


no fear
my personal favorite so far is thompson. he's from my part of the world, he speaks my language. second, giuliani. i think he's a tough nut. (gingrinch is probably the smartest of them all but sadly, thanx to the msm, unelectable) but whoever the candidate is (as we say in holly springs, alabama) they best understand that they're gonna be running against clinton and her machine. and it's gonna get dirty.

obama? lightweight. edwards? he doesn't have the gonads to be her intern. the clintonistas will eat these guys for brunch. this is akin to usc playing popcorn u. the week before the big game with notre dame. pete carroll can talk all he wants but they're prepping for the irish. ditto clinton. she's in cruise control (dixie dregs. damn good tune!) now all the while digging on potential republicans. (thompson, giuliani, romney) october surprise??? try the surprise of the week!

i predict this will be the dirtiest presidential campaign in our nation's history. whoever the repub. candidate is, he'd better not be afraid to play in the mud.

no fear
sorry about that repost. that refresh button is a cursor magnet on my box.

Uncle Max
I've saw Loyal Democrat around the other day, but it seems he has been around less recently. Might be a busy time of year for him or something.

I supprt Fred because.....
I support Fred Thomson because he's the only candidate who's talking about what the Federal government should not be doing for us. The other candidates, both Democrat and Republican, only talk about big government solutions to all issues.

Remember, a Federal government that is big enough to give you everything you need is big enough to take everything you have.

Parker drinkin the Fred Kool-Aid
You know who doesn't think it was a smart move for Fred to snub the debate? The likely Republican Primary voters in New Hampshire who now believe, and rightfully so, that Fred is more interested in yucking it up with Leno than addressing the American people.

Fred is a stumbling coward who fears any sort of hard questioning at all. He's nothing more than a Clinton wannabe who never wants to go anywhere or say anything that isn't heavily scripted.

There's also the matter of him funneling PAC funds to his son for work that was never done.

So I suppose if we want a corrupt status quo Washington insider and Hollyweird mouthpiece, we should vote for Fred. Fred loves federalism so much he helped push through McCain Feingold. Fred is so consistent he lobbied for pro-abortion groups.

Stop drinking the Kool-Aid. Fred is a fraud who is hoping and praying that you never require him to answer any difficult questions.

Fred Head
Most,not all but most former Buchannanites,Perotistas,Libertairans,& Independents HAVE been waiting for Fred Thompson to decide to make the sacrifices necessary to Run for President. People,-- he's DEADLY serious about his Faith in God, & his commitment to protect this Nation,it's borders, people,& constitution from ALL enemies foreign or domestic,BELIEVE it! He's is going to make GREAT President.

Bamn, I applaud you!!!
I am going to check out IMWITHFRED. Then I am most likely FINALLY going to send a check to his campaign. I am tight with my money and for my money he is the only one with guts enough to do something even close to my way of thinking. Join me please, do the same. Now the real fun begins. Those that support Hunter, Tancredo, etc. I believe you believe your guy is the best, but, unfortunately, they are not going to get anywhere - join me is supporting one who is.

to lilly
As for Thompson getting into the race late my personal feeling is that everyone else got in too early. I am somewhat of a political junkie myself but I believe even I will be burnt out by November 2008. Whatever happened to the days when presidential campaigns didn't start until the New Hampshire primary in February of the election year and before that you really didn't know much about most of the candidates? Nine months should be plenty of time for a decent campaign where all the candidates have the opportunity to present themselves to the public. But two years is ridiculous. As for his criticism of Iran's president I think he is being too kind. Your idea of diplomacy is nothing short of masochism where we should let ourselves get beat up by every tin horn dictator who has a perceived beef with us. And then if we complain that is our fault too. To me it is unimaginable that Hugo Chavez loses no respect for comparing our President to the devil in public while Bush is demonized just for being alive. Diplomacy means that we will not always agree with all foreign governments just so they will think nice of us. Liberals like you Lilly think that if foreigners don't agree with us we must be wrong. Maybe it is the others who are wrong. In any event there is a difference between stubborness and standing up for your principles. But you liberals believe in moral relativism so you think principles are a waste of time anyway. Making people like us seems to be your main goal. But you can't make everyone like everyone else all the time. You can try but I'm afraid your idea of making people like us just means giving in all the time. That is a very sorry way to live.

Bman1
No, it would mean that Fred wants to coast on the hopes and dreams of conservatives even though he's never done anything for us, ever.

Fred would however, if we go by his actions instead of his newfound conservative words, heavily restrict political speech ala McCain Feingold, do absolutely zero for conservative causes as was the case in his unmemorable Senate existence.

Fred is the perfect blank slate candidate to post up our dreams on. He's done nothing for us but stab us in the back and now he wants to pretend he's above debate?

So if you want to support the candidate with zero executive experience, zero conservative leadership, and zero respect for your intelligence, be my guest. As for me, I eagerly await Fred's plan on how to avoid the next debate.

lilly
All of the whining and crying you have been doing about sub-standard goods out of China and you think it's just hunky dorry for Clinton to take money from Hsu which is ILLEGAL? Or is it you think it's okay because she's a Democrat?

Fred
He gets the big picture. If nothing else he will at the very least makes the candidates pin down their ambiguous positions. Go for it Fred!

re Thompson the RINO
Stang200s6 worries that Thompson is too much of a RINO for the Republicans. Fine. But, let's remember that the object of this game is winning. We have our opportunity in the primary to vote our choice, but in the end, it's the general election that counts. If the Republican Party puts up Thompson or Guiliani, will you refuse to vote because you don't think they're conservative enough? To win we must draw voters from the center. If not, Clinton wins. Is that a more attractive prospect for you than Thompson or Guiliani [or someone else]? You can't always get what you want. Vote your hearts and minds, but vote to win.

re Thompson the RINO
Stang200s6 worries that Thompson is too much of a RINO for the Republicans. Fine. But, let's remember that the object of this game is winning. We have our opportunity in the primary to vote our choice, but in the end, it's the general election that counts. If the Republican Party puts up Thompson or Guiliani, will you refuse to vote because you don't think they're conservative enough? To win we must draw voters from the center. If not, Clinton wins. Is that a more attractive prospect for you than Thompson or Guiliani [or someone else]? You can't always get what you want. Vote your hearts and minds, but vote to win.

Bman
Why do conservatives care so much about Hsu, and nothing about the 7 convicted felons who were Bush 'Pioneers':

Tom Noe: laundering donations to Bush-Cheney 04
Larry Householder: alleged skimming of campaign funds
Jack Abramoff: corruption, wire fraud (he stole around $23 million), and possibly murder for hire
Nicholas Hurtgen: extortion
Brent Wilkes: bribing Randy Cunningham and possibly helping DeLay launder money
Maurice "Hank" Greenberg: stock manipulation
Manuel Stamatakis: suspect insurance contracts negotiated for the Philadelphia port authority
Ken "Kenny Boy" Lay: all kinds of business fraud

Last time I checked, 7 was greater than 1.

Bman1
I wondered that about Hsu. What do you want to bet some liberal judge will let him off with a minor slap?

Bman1
I wondered about that. What do you want to bet some liberal judge will let him off with a minor slap?

A list
Thompson-POTUS
Huckabee-VP
Romney-Sec. fo State
Hunter-HS
Gingrich-Chief of Staff
Giuliani-AG
McCain-Sec. of Def
Paul-just give him to the Dems!

animalgirl
When you get some facts get back to us. For the record I don't like funny money on either side of the aisle. That is the difference between you and I. Moral Reletivists like yourself think two wrongs equal a right. You also are ignorant enough to think everyone falls for your subterfuge...Newsflash, we don't.

Uncle Max ... Loyal Democrat ...
I think Loyal Democrat drank some electric kool-aide (drink laced with LSD) and now, not only does he truly believe his own satire, he's become a mumbling, mis-spelling idiot and changed his TH handle to "Van". At least, near as I can tell he did.

Lolo2 & Bman1
What do you guys think of Greenberg's article on Edwards?

Teacher
I will not vote for Rudy, McCain, or Romney under ANY circumstances. I'd vote 3rd party on my way to the gun range that morning then come home that night and drink a few beers as the told me Hillary won the election. I will not vote for any candidate that held hands with Cill Clinton on the White House steps calling for the collection of my guns (Rudy). I will not vote for a candidate that wants to grant amnesty (McCain). I will not vote for a candidate that wants to force me to buy health insurance (Romney).

If Thompson goes as far to the left as any of them I will not vote for him under any circumstances either. As it sits I'm hopeful those who remain in the Republican party, which is much more of a left leaning group now then it was before 10% of the American population left the party, will return to it's constitutional roots and support a constitutionalist and patriot which in my mind limits it to Hunter, Tancredo, Cox, and Paul. I will have hard time voting for any of the others as they all want to eliminate more of my freedoms.

Thompson supporting affirmative action and opposing background checks at gun shows does not sit well with me. Criminals should be able to get guns as easily as they can. His record against the 1st amendment is not good. He voted to enlarge NATO. He voted with the insurance companies and against the consumer when it came to health care. He voted for shrinking the military.

I will not blindly vote for one party over another any longer. I will vote for the best candidate even if they have no chance to win. You can take that as I would hand the country to Hillary if you'd like, but I'd rather her screw everything up in a hurry and bring about the revolution then it be done slowly where I have to suffer for a few decades before people realize they lost everything they once had.

Lolo2 & Bman1
What do you guys think of Greenberg's article on Edwards?

Oh Animalgirl....
Do we really need to rehash all crooks that held hands with the Clintons?

C'mon, knock it off...

This Website
Is just awful. Missing posts, double posts, pages not loading.

Liberals posting all over theplace!!!

AAAAAHHH!!!

Thompson's "conservative" credentials
I'm amazed that people think that Thompson is the answer for disgruntled conservatives seeking a candidate they can support. He is basically McCain-lite.

Some of his first bills in his Senate career (the 104th Congress) were for campaign finance "reform" (Senate bill 3981), helping trial lawyers (Senate Amendment 618), setting aside federal tax dollars to renovate historically black colleges (Senate bill 1584) and worst of all allowing the federal government to take over the juvenile justice system (Senate bill 1952). That last bill would not only give federal control over the juvenile justice system, but would also mandate that 75% of the money for juvenile justice programs was used on social programs rather than locking up violent offenders. Other than that , the only things he got done was naming federal buildings after his friends. He didn't sponsor one single piece of legislation on either defense or immigration, the two biggest issues facing our country.

Duncan Hunter is still the only choice for conservatives.

http://www.gohunter08.com


Fred Thompson
Is one of the most conservative of all the candidates. Rudy certainly isn't and neither is McCain. I'm not sure if Romney is, he talks a good game. I too like Hunter, and Tancredo, but I don't think they can win. Huckabee signed into law in Arkansas an instate tuition for illegals.Ron Paul has some good ideas, but is a total nut case on others.
Yes I'm with Fred, and have been for some time.
GO FRED!!!

Fred Thompson
Is one of the most conservative of all the candidates. Rudy certainly isn't and neither is McCain. I'm not sure if Romney is, he talks a good game. I too like Hunter, and Tancredo, but I don't think they can win. Huckabee signed into law in Arkansas an instate tuition for illegals.Ron Paul has some good ideas, but is a total nut case on others.
Yes I'm with Fred, and have been for some time.
GO FRED!!!

Uncle Max ... Loyal Democrat ...
I think Loyal Democrat drank some electric kool-aide (drink laced with LSD) and now, not only does he truly believe his own satire, he's become a mumbling, mis-spelling idiot and changed his TH handle to "Van". At least, near as I can tell he did.

Ooops
I thought I wouldn't fall victim from the dreaded double post. Remember to delete your comments from the box once you post them but BEFORE you hit "refresh".

Fred explained
On Fox this morning that some of the things he voted against, was because they were things that should have been left up to the state, and not the Federal Government. He is a Federalist.

No Fred For Me Either.
I only became a political junkie because Fred showed up on the scene. BUt after I was in his movement for a few months and had time to read about his positions and his political history, I sadly decided that he is just another neoconservative - a southern democrat in republican clothing.

The poster above is correct: Hunter, Cox, Tancredo and Paul are the only chances we have for any kind of real change.

Country first, party second.


Criticisms that don't matter?
Why did Americans become so stupid that voting records ceased to be considered a viable point of contention?

http://conservativesagainstfred.wordpress.com/

? FOR restricting the rights of grassroots organizations to communicate with the public. See ACU’s vote 3, 1998.

? FOR allowing the IRS to require political and policy organizations to disclose their membership. (The Clinton Administration used IRS intimidation against conservative groups.) See ACU’s vote 11, 2000.

? AGAINST impeachment proceedings against President Clinton See ACU’s vote 1, 1999.

? FOR handouts to politicians, specifically taxpayer funding of presidential campaigns. See ACU’s vote 6, 1995.

? FOR handouts to politicians, specifically congressional perks such as postage and broadcast time funded by taxpayers. See ACU’s vote 13, 1996.

? AGAINST restraints on federal spending,. See ACU’s vote 6, 1997.

? FOR affirmative action in federal contracts. See ACU’s vote 9, 1995.

? FOR the Legal Services Corporation,. See ACU’s vote 16, 1995, and vote 17, 1999.

? FOR an increase in the minimum wage,. See ACU’s vote 16, 1996.

? FOR open-ended military commitments, specifically in regard to U.S. troops in Kosovo. See ACU’s vote 8, 2000.

? FOR corporate welfare, specifically the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). See ACU’s vote 23. 1999.

? AGAINST worker and shareholder rights, specifically the Hatch (R-UT) amendment to require unions and corporations to obtain permission from dues-paying members or shareholders before spending money on political activities. See ACU’s votes 4 and 5, 2001.

? AGAINST property rights and FOR unlimited presidential power, specifically by allowing President Clinton to implement the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, which he established by executive order, without congressional approval. See ACU’s vote 20, 1997.

? FOR restricting the First Amendment (free speech) rights of independent groups. See ACU’s vote 23, 1997.

Teacher
You are totally wrong, and it is people like you who continue to vote for the lesser of two evils that are ruining this great nation!! If you vote for evil you will get evil. Do you not understand that simple principle?

America needs to wake up to the scam that is being put on them, the old tactic of telling a lie over and over until it is accepted and believed to be true. The lie is that somehow, only these elites have the wisdom, experience, and knowledge to govern. Says who? Well,they do. After all, they have graduated from Yale and Harvard, they are mostly all lawyers, they have the "connections". Remember that both Kerry and Bush were members of the secret 'Skull & Bones' club.

How much longer are you going to trust these same individuals, who have been selling out this nation to the internationalist cabal that hates America? How many more times you will vote this bunch into office, always expecting the different result that never has and never will materialize if you keep doing the same thing. That is insane, as Einstein explained.

Get off the Dem/GOP/MSM propaganda and wake up!! The time is now for a real revolution at the ballot box, and an end to continued power in the same hands election after election.

You need to visit my website, JOEOLIVAFORPRESIDENT.ORG, and get a clear picture of how to restore this nation to its founding principles. Check it out, what's to lose? The elites have already stolen our inheritance, when oh when are we going to reclaim it? It will never happen if we elect another elite President. Thanks, Joe

MC1
On the money!!!!



Stang006...Where in the heck do you get your facts??? Outer space???

angelatc
Did you ever consider that website your using has an agenda? I have been following Fred since before he ran for Senate and since then. YOUR WRONG!!!!!!!

FROG
"Loyal Democrat" is definitely NOT "Van".

The last time I asked, he was still serving in uniform and was in Iraq. I've noticed the frequency of his posts have diminished since the surge.

Perhaps he's a little "busy" right now... you think?

Primus54...
Believe, I meant no disrespect to LD. And if he's serving our fine country by putting himself in harm's way, than I have even greater respect for him. My post was a feeble attempt at a joke about Van. My apologies to LD for the comparison. I kept thinking Van's ranting was an extremely poor attempt at poking fun at liberals. I feel sorry for the likes of Van. Truthfully though, Van doesn't need my pity as much as he needs my prayers. Which is what I need to do more of then posting silly messages on obscure blogs.

I'm not that hot about Fred. sigh.
I watched the Republican debate on Wednesday, and saw the Thompson Leno appearance on Youtube, and, I gotta tell you - I don't get the excitement about Fred Thompson. I WANT to be excited about him, since I'm pretty conservative, but he just seemed sorta boring. Plus, he didn't really accomplish that much while he was in the Senate. Bill Frist, the other Senator from Tennessee who was first elected the same year as Thompson, seemed to do a lot more.

Of the Republicans, Giuliani, Romney and Huckabee actually have executive experience. Romney and Huckabee were governors, and Giuliani was mayor of a city that is larger than many states. In my mind, that gives them more qualification to run the country. Plus they all seem more dynamic than Thompson, and have shared interesting ideas.

Ideally, I would love to see Huckabee or Duncan Hunter as the nominee. But whoever wins has to have the toughness to take on Hillary, who will fight dirty. I don't know if Fred has that kind of toughness. I think Giuliani does, and Huckabee is displaying that kind of passion, as well.

At any rate, whoever the Republican candidate is, I'm going to end up voting for him against Hillary. I just cannot stand that woman.


Bman1 writes:
"I'll end up voting for whoever gets the nomination as long as it isn't Ron Paul."

Agreed. I was watching the debate the other night and when crank paul started talking about how the airlines should police themselves and the government should get out of the way, I said YEAH! Say, maybe ron crank's not so bad...

then he self-destructed.

He is loony bird bait. He is the worst parts of perot and buchanan tied up in a leather bag

angelatc
Just which candidate are you shilling for?

FROG
No problem, Frog.

Say "Hi" the the "Big Guy" for me while you are at it. We haven't spoken for a few hours. :)

Cheers!

Ron Paul??
Like I said on another thread, I have no problem with anyone calling out liberals for their lunacy, but when that individual starts blaming anyone other than islamic terrorists for 9/11 they lose all credibility.

And airlines policing themselves??

They can't even understand that R rated in-flight movies with graphic violence and language might not be suitable for children, does anyone trust these suits to "police" anything but their own stock portfolio??

Ron Paul comments
I find it amazing that, as much as neocons dislike Ron Paul, the best they can come up with is name-calling (he's a kook) and straw man arguements (he blames us for 9/11).

Moonkeeper
I find it amazing that people like you continue to spout buzzwords from the liberal talking points handbook like "neocons".

So what? You think we were responsible for 9/11 like Ron Paul?

Then you're a kook too....

Come up with something original please...

Thompson the RINO redux
Stang200s6, Joe Oliva, et al

I consider myself very conservative and have some experience in the muddled east, however reality cannot be avoided. If by taking the moral high ground and voting for a candidate that cannot win, you are merely giving the election to the opposition.
It has been argued that Perot's run in 1992 gave Clinton the win, and that Nader's in 2000 took enough away from Gore to give Bush the win.
Personally, I'd like to see Hunter in the Oval Office, but I don't think he'll fly with the general electorate.
I am not enamored with Thompson, but would much rather see him win than Clinton.
Stang200s6's comment: "I will vote for the best candidate even if they have no chance to win. You can take that as I would hand the country to Hillary if you'd like, but I'd rather her screw everything up in a hurry and bring about the revolution..." presumes a revolution that I believe this country is nowhere near ready for.
Fight the fights you can win; otherwise, delay and obstruct until you can.

The flip side
The Thompson campaign clearly made the decision to skip the debate and appear on Jay Leno for all the reasons in the article. But to only look at their reasons, or Kathleens, would miss the risk aspect. Thompson may have appealed to a broader audience, but not to New Hampshire. What good does a broader appeal do you if you lose a critical first in the nation primary. If Fred Thompson loses, or comes in 3rd in New Hamshire, people will look back to the day he skipped the debate and chose Jay. Bottom line, it benefits him on some level, but the risk are there as well. Time will tell.

Lilly
I've noticed plenty of swaggering show offy cowboys who scorn thought in the Democratic party who have not hesitated a nanosecond to vilify our president during wartime. How about Schumer's statement yesterday that it isn't our troops that are facilitating peace in Iraq, it's...the warlords.

Oh, I'm sorry, that's okay because he is a liberal Democrat and thus, by definition he is right.

Bush-the show offy cowboy; and Harry Reid, Murtha, and Schumer-the thoughful statesmen.

overall
Overall Fred is a top tier candidate. He is smart and media savvy. He can communicate well (most of the time). He has a natural following.

He did wait to long, he had his reasons. However, had he launched in June he would be leading Rudy at this point. The voters would have cut him some slack while he and his organization got up to speed. Now there is no slack.

Romney will win IA and NH. Fred has to win SC and maybe FL. He has to put in a ground game in those states to win. He can not win without a GOTV. That takes time and money.

The Tonight Show helps your national poll numbers but how many Republicans, who actually write checks and vote in the primaries, were watching the debate instead of the tonight show?

It will be a long 4 months. A lot can happen.


Hemi_Cuda
"So what? You think we were responsible for 9/11 like Ron Paul?

Then you're a kook too....

Come up with something original please..."

Ron Paul does not think we were responsible for 9/11. Arguing against him saying we are responsible is the equivalent of setting up a straw man. No different then some liberal claiming that you want to kill children and arguing against it because you don't believe in socialized medicine.

I used the "liberal buzzword," as you call it, to point out those that are socially extremely conservative, and believe in being the police of the world. They are the same that CLAIM to support fiscal responsibility, but put it on the back burner every time an actual vote comes up. As a result of ....ummm.... "those that have consistently voted based on big gov't repubs being the lesser of evils," our national debt is higher, we're still in 130 countries militarily, medicine is far more SOCIALIZED then it ever was before, and eminent domain abuses have yet to be fixed. But hey, at least gays can't call themselves married.....


How's this sound?
Fred Thompson - President
Tom Tancredo - VP (TnT)
Ted Nugent - Sec of State (no more diplomatic BS)

I know Ted would never get confirmed, but Fred could appoint during recess, and Ted could kick some butt for a year. We need someone in that position who doesn't pretend it smells like a rose garden when he's standing in a sewer treatment plant.

Moonkeeper
Did you actually watch the debates and digest what RP was saying?

AyaRavaTaja
You just might have something there with the NUGE! There's a man that knows when to give the finger!

Lolo
"Did you actually watch the debates and digest what RP was saying?"

Yes. Its amazing how some will try to spin what he says because he doesn't believe in an aggressive foreign policy. Those that read and listen to the actual words he said, instead of getting an impression based on loaded follow-up questions by Fox News moderators, also understand what he said.

Lolo
Yes, I did. Its amazing how people will try to spin what he says. Those that actually listen to his words and read the transcripts of the debate will see the only ones suggesting that 9/11 was our fault are the moderators when they try to pin Ron Paul as a US hater.

ugh
Sorry for the double post.

Moonkeeper
Keep lying to yourself if it makes you feel better. He did say it verbatim. He also said alot of other things. Like make industry protect themselves. Let see prices sky rocket while they utterly fail at it, not to mention that is the President's and the govt. job. Let also look at what else he said. He's gonna do away with the CIA, NSA, IRS, HS and a whole lot of other departments. My favorite was the Federal Reserve. Say HELLO ENRON! Then in the same breath he said he was gonna protect you! Yeah RIGHT! Wanna buy a bridge?

Loved it when Huckabee cleaned his clock! Hope he does it again. May have to give Huckabee money now just for that!

Moonkeeper
Ron Paul knows less about how to run foreign policy than I do. The idea is "foreign" to him (pun intended).

It is truly a shame because he really does have some good ideas otherwise. Whether because of his style or his organization, he now has the label and nothing is going to change it... he's simply not a top-tier candidate and therefore does not or will not have the dollars to shake the image.

I am a true Reagan conservative and I believe Fred Thompson is the closest ELECTABLE candidate we're going to get to someone who will govern similarly. The key word here is ELECTABLE. He can beat Hitlary... probably soundly. And with the SCOTUS appointments that will likely happen in the next term, I won't take a chance on the Hildabeast being the nominator.

To moonkeeper re: 3:21pm post
Speaking of national debt, fiscal responsibility and socialized medicine could you please explain these funding requests from Ron Paul? These were among 65 pages of earmark requests from the libertarian, taxpayer hero Ron Paul.

Wild American Shrimp Marketing
Shrimp Fishing Effort Research
Matagorda Episcopal Health Outreach Program
Vanadium Safety Readiness
Edna Theater in Edna, TX
Brazoria County Shore Protection
antibiotics testing of seafood

I'm sure shrimp marketing is in the Constitution somewhere. I just haven't located it yet.

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/allpolitics/0706/popup.congress.earmarks/pdfs/tx.14.paul.pdf

Thompson on Hannity
Did anyone hear it? Well, a lot of " that's between me and the American People" in answer to MANY of the questions. He would not answer any policy questions saying that he still has a lot of work to do. Nor would he dilineate any differences with the other guys.

Question: What HAS he been doing the past 6 months? Guess he just didn't have any time to prepare to even answer simple questions.

Basically, I get the idea that he thinks this is a popularity contest and that the American people will choose him because they like him.

Hey, you never know!

Thompson on Leno
Was an excellent move. Why? Although the majority of us believe that Hillbillary will win the democratic primaries--there are some reasonable democrats that don't want another Clinton in office either. A lot of people, no matter where you stand on the political fence, dislike and don't trust her.

So, what better way to wooo uncertain voters who don't like Hillbillary? Get on the tonight show that has millions of viewers, and have Fred charm them all. It's a great venue, a great person conducting the interview without the general BS to muck it up. He was smart.

But for the next debate....He better frickin be there!

Ron Paul is a Shill for Shrillary
He is only in this race to help the Clintons back into the White House, just like that other nut, Ross Perot.

Ron Paul

Ross Perot

Has a certain similarity, ay?

Umm . . . Sam
How can Paul be a leading contender whether "people like it or not"? I thought becoming a leading contender was all about actually having supporters. ?

Which candidates are FOX and NBC throwing out? I must have missed it. Okay, I know Fox leans towards Rudy, but they are fair with all of the candidates. I believe it is the candidates that are throwing themselves out there and winning support. Somehow Paul just can't seem to be able to do that. Must be a conspiracy.

Fred Thompson????????
I was a former supporter if I had to vote for an LGBT Republican candidate until he and his staff recanted his original position that was stated during his initial interview with Chris Wallace. Regarding gay marriage, now he espouses the socially liberal line ('cause he's a social liberal) that marriage should be left to the states. Unfortunately, that doesn't take into account neurotic (politely referred to as "activist")judges from usurping the will of the people regarding the institution of marriage. We're still waiting for a legitimate conservative for the 2008 POTUS nomination. And after watching the last Republican debate, Tancredo is too shrill (although definitely on message) and another social liberal. I recognize that a 2008 Republican ticket will need to consist of a social liberal and social conservative to win the presidential election. Anything less and the Republicans lose the White House and Congress. Thank you LGBT staff members of the RNC and RSCC for your vast miscalculation by foisting upon the Republican base nothing but social liberals.

Lilly
You've earned yourself the usual dose of vituperation. I'll just politely disagree.

First of all, Ahmadinejad IS nuts (to use a clinical term). This guy actually believes that the successor to Mohammed (the "Hidden Mahdi") is here on Earth, waiting for the right apocalyptic moment to reveal himself and implement a global caliphate--in other words, world-wide Muslim rule in the hands of one man. If you ever think that evangelical Christians waiting for the second coming of Christ are half a bubble off of plumb, this guy's far nuttier...and he's about to get his finger on the button of nuclear weapons.

Personally, I'm glad to see a prospective leader willing to call a spade a spade. Reagan, Thatcher and John Paul II cast the conflict between the free world and the Soviet Union in good-vs.-evil terms, and that was critical to ending the Cold War. Casting the current war against Islamism in similar terms--sane-vs.-insane, stability-vs.-chaos terms may help us in the long run.

I would have liked to see him declare earlier, but he explained why he didn't: it's been traditional for candidates to declare after Labor Day the year before the election. That doesn't ring entirely true with the early primaries this time around, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and take him at his word.

win
Thompson-Kasich-a sure win.

Fred Thompson
Be careful what you wish for!

Fred was a shamnesty backer 2 months ago! You really think he has changed his mind? Or is he fooling you?

Fred is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the U.S. arm of the NAU,


Ron Paul voted against his fund requests
Speaking of national debt, fiscal responsibility and socialized medicine could you please explain "these funding requests from Ron Paul? These were among 65 pages of earmark requests from the libertarian, taxpayer hero Ron Paul.

Wild American Shrimp Marketing
Shrimp Fishing Effort Research
Matagorda Episcopal Health Outreach Program
Vanadium Safety Readiness
Edna Theater in Edna, TX
Brazoria County Shore Protection
antibiotics testing of seafood

I'm sure shrimp marketing is in the Constitution somewhere. I just haven't located it yet."

I love it when people bring this up:

If funding requests are going to go out, he shouldn't be in on it?

Thats like the whole term limits arguement. If a congressman is in favor of term limits, he should volutarily limit his terms. This, of course, would empower further, those that are against term limits, as their base would be able to grow for longer periods of time in congress.

The key point here, is that he ultimately votes AGAINST the final bill, because the final bill is ultimately unconstitutional. Though, I'm "sure" you knew he voted in line with the Constitution already. :)




At least Christians...
have some solid reasons for believing in the second coming of Christ. Amidinnerjacket is just engaging in wishful thinking. Of course, given that part of the prophesy he believes in requires action on the part of someone in his position of power, he should be feared.

He thinks that if he wipes Israel off the face of the map, that the 12th Imam will arise.

Christians, on the other hand, know that there is nothing they can do to accelerate the second coming.



Lolo
I'm confused about your stance....are you a liberal?

You believe that Enron would happen without regulation? Enron only occured because it took advantage of 200 pages of additional regulation and political connections. Lack of regulation would sent Enron packing long beforethey they were built up as much as they were.

You believe industry would fail and prices would skyrocket if regulation wasn't there? How would someone make money in a free market if they aren't making voluntary transactions? We're regulated now and energy prices have risen the last couple years. The first half of the century, when our energy policy was more free market, energy prices plummeted.

As for industry "protecting" themselves, his arguement was that 9/11 was less likely to occur if the airlines were allowed to set their own rules. That includes allowing guns on board. The counter arguement would be that the terrorists would then have guns. The counter-counterarguement would be, so would the passengers.

As for the Fed, there have been 3 cases in history in which banks were required to have 100% of deposits on reserve, and currency had to be backed by specie. In each case, prosperity broke out. In each case, the government got greedy and allowed the bank to lend to them the reserve, and in each case the prosperity slowed or came to an end. Also, the primary reason for the Great Depression was a violent, sustained tightening of the money supply.

So do you believe gov't shouldn't be smaller?

A couple changes to the list
Lolo2 writes:
A list
Thompson-POTUS
Huckabee-VP
Romney-Sec. fo State
Hunter-HS
Gingrich-Chief of Staff
Giuliani-AG
McCain-Sec. of Def
Paul-just give him to the Dems!


Overall the list is pretty good, but I'd like to suggest a couple changes.

Thompson/Gingrich - POTUS/VP or vice versa
Huckabee - Chief of Staff
Giuliani - Sec of State
Romney - Sec of Def
Hunter - Homeland Sec
Tancredo = AG
McRino and Paul - Give them to the circus, they're both clowns.

It's official
Run, Fred, run! And more importantly...

Win, Fred, win!

Fred is NOT that conservative
I keep hearing this nonsense about Thompson being trustworthy and the guy for our borders and conserative values. Why? Honestly, I'm beginning to think there's little more involved than a baritone voice, a tall stature, and a guy on TV.

As to why this guy is seen as good on the border, I have no clue. He claims he wants to deport illegals "if we catch them." Sort of. He's already said that he's not really concerned about the 12 million already here, but the next 12-million. He says that, but this is also a guy who says he sees no reason for a border fence of "brick and mortar." Oh, and he doesn't believe employers should be burdened with proving that their employees are working here legally.

I guess that makes sense, since he also voted against creating a federally-issued ID to legal immigrants so that employers could actually verify whether those they hired were indeed legal. *rolls eyes*

And there was also that vote to continue to extend federal assistance to illegals in 1996.

Thompson is at best 4th best on the border, trailing far behind Tancredo, Hunter, and Romney. Far behind.

So here we have Thompson, who opposes a federal marriage amendment that defines marriage. Who opposes federal tort reform--typical of a trial lawyer who wants to defend his buddies' rights to venue shop. Bad for American corporations who spend more on defending lawsuits than on research & development.

And I'm supposed to vote for a guy with the above positions, who looks 15-20 years older than he really is, and who has cancer???

Why?

Ron Paul voting against his own requests
Moonkeeper,
So what you are saying is that Ron Paul votes against the bill because he thinks it is unconstitutional, but since it is going to pass anyway he wants to make sure he gets some of the pork he is so vehemently against. Sounds hypocritical to me. Reminds me of Clinton bashing Christians but then making sure he got photo ops carrying a huge Bible into church.

Ron Paul with his head in the sand foreign policy and do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do fiscal record he would make a great Democratic Party candidate for POTUS.

I like all the Red Candidates
I will be voting for Mitt Romney because I think he is by far the best choice for president. He has the tract record of accomplishment. I think Mitt's prior position on abortion is less of a problem than Ronald Reagan's flip on that important issue. Of all the candidates I think Mitt Romney would execute the conservative agenda the most effectively. He is the only candidate who has the kind of executive success I would like to see in every presidential candidate. The best paid CEOs in the country should run for president every year.

However, I think Fred Thompson is also a worthy candidate and I don't discredit anyone who chooses him; I will vote for Fred, Rudy or John. I'd even vote for Ron Paul before Hillary.
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.