Posted on 03/29/2007 6:58:58 AM PDT by meg88
For the past few days, movement "conservatives" and GOP cheerleaders have been ecstatic that Fred Thompson, former senator from Tennessee, may form an exploratory committee to seek the GOP nomination for president. "Now we'll have a conservative in there," said one person, who, I assume, has no idea what a real conservative is.
There already are two fine conservative candidates seeking the nomination: Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo. And Fred Thompson does not even come close measuring up to them.
Fred Thompson is a neocon globalist.
First and foremost, let's look at immigration. A third-world invasion of the USA is taking place, and it is up to patriots to stop it.
As Jean Raspail taught us in Camp of the Saints, "the greatest conservative novel ever written," we can fight back and reverse the invasion, or we can watch the West be destroyed.
Although Fred Thompson is tougher than McCain and Giuliani on border enforcement, which isn't saying much seeing how they line up with Barack Obama, he had a rather lackluster record on immigration while in the Senate.
As one commentator notes: "Overall, Americans for Better Immigration gives [Thompson] a career grade of C; on chain migration, C; visa lottery, C-; reducing unnecessary visas, F; on reducing asylum fraud, C-; on reducing amnesties, D; and on interior enforcement, C+. Although he was tough on border control, he was lacking in almost every other area." [1]
Fred Thompson also supports affirmative action, and ideologically worships free trade, regardless how much it harms America. Historically, conservatives have opposed free trade, but Thompson, like others, has been "neoconned" into backing it.
He furthermore is a "fellow" at the American Enterprise Institute, one of the largest neocon think-tanks, which demonstrates where his true loyalty lies. If you did not receive the Burkean memo, the transformation of the Middle East to liberal democracy is Jacobin, not conservative. There is not a single thing conservative about the membership of AEI. They are neocon / neoliberal globalists.
Why are neoncons backing Thompson? Ideally, being ex-Trotskyites themselves, neocons would prefer a liberal candidate, like McCain, Giuliani or Romney. But they see that conservatives deplore these candidates, and now are going to try to peddle Fred Thompson, who is just socially conservative enough and just tough enough on the borders, even if it is feigned, to woo naive GOP voters. But let's hope this nefarious neocon plot fails.
Let's pray that the more real conservatives learn about Fred Thompson, the more unacceptable he will appear
Yes, Pat Buchanan conservatives oppose free trade. Ronald Reagan conservatives, not so much. Thompson is closer to Reagan than any of the other mentioned candidates.
Thompson is pro-affirmative action?
Pat Buchanan, is that you? If not, someone else is riding to the sound of your gums.
Ron Paul if you wish to cut and run in Iraq. Tancredo's a great activist, but such figures seldom do well in pursuit of higher office.
Hunter is a great congressman and is still my ideological first choice, but I don't see his campaign doing the right things to get traction, and he's running out of time in a hurry.
Meanwhile, if the tin-eared type who wrote this bothered to listen to Thompson's more recent positions, he realizes we need enforcement first. Which is a sane approach no matter what your opinions as to how this country should handle the illegals already here.
Plus, compare Thompson to Rudy, McVain and Romney. The half-empty glass quickly looks half-full.
Sorry, Basil ... you used the "n" word.
I stopped reading, right there ... you have no credibility.
Why are neoncons backing Thompson? Ideally, being ex-Trotskyites themselves, neocons would prefer a liberal candidate, like McCain, Giuliani or Romney. But they see that conservatives deplore these candidates, and now are going to try to peddle Fred Thompson, who is just socially conservative enough and just tough enough on the borders, even if it is feigned, to woo naive GOP voters. But let's hope this nefarious neocon plot fails.
So we can get a full blooded liberal like Giuliani?
Fred Thompson:
~snip~
I think its time for a little plain talk to the leaders of Mexico. Something like:
hey guys, you’re our friends and neighbors and we love you but it’s time you had a little dose of reality. A sovereign nation loses that status if it cannot secure its own borders and we are going to do whatever is necessary to do so, although our policies won’t be as harsh as yours are along your southern border. And criticizing the U.S. for alternately doing too much and too little to stop your illegal activities is not going to set too well with Americans of good will who are trying to figure a way out of the mess that your and our open borders policy has already created.
My friends, it’s also time for a little introspection. Since we all agree that improving Mexico’s economy will help with the illegal-immigration problem, you might want to consider your own left-of -center policies. For example, nationalized industries are not known for enhancing economic growth. Just a thought. But here’s something even more to the point that you might want to think about: What does it say about the leadership of a country when that country’s economy and politics are dependent upon the exportation of its own citizens?
~snip~
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjhkYzZiNTAxZjAyZTNjNzkxNjA2ZTNmNDBhNjhlYWU=
I like Tancredo and Ron Paul, although I think we've got to be more offensive in the WOT than Paul would be. I'll likely cast a vote for Tancredo in the primary, though it could be Duncan Hunter.
That out of the way, Tancredo may get my vote and his, but he ain't getting the nomination.
LOL! If Fred Thompson is a "Neocon Globalist" then what does this make Giuliani, McCain and Romney? Communist dictators?
The media likes McCain, Giuliani and Romney because they will be the easiest to ambush next fall after the conventions.
Oh, jeez, not another Buchanan-worshipping dolt.
The question is whether Thompson is another Reagan, or another Bush?
A ticket with Thompson and Hunter on it would be a good one, I think.
Sounds OK by me!
On the free trade issue, he recognizes (correctly) that China and the US are mutually dependent on one another economically, for better or for worse.
He also acknowledges (correctly) that while the above is true, we still must remember that China has weapons pointed at Taiwan, I don't know of ANY other candidate who has made that point, except perhaps Hunter.
How about Brownback? (if he could only get his stuff together on immigration)
Who invented this idiotic word, "Neocon" anyway?
I consider it an insult by the left. It's a ridiculous word.
Anyone that uses it is a Leftist-Socialist-Tard. :) There, I feel much better now. Good morning all.
Which gives Fred a great opportunity to slip right in there under the media's noses before they know what hit them.
dumping on fred thompson because hes a threat to your guiliani i see.
The attacks have begun.
"Neocon", like the terms "racist" or "sexist", has no meaning anymore beyond "I don't like what you're saying, but I'm too stupid to know how to argue with you about it".
Weak on the WOT, and one of those who believes that being pro-life is the ONLY requirement to being a conservative. While pro-life values are very important, I think that's what is wrong today - too many Republicans think that as long as you're pro-life it's OK to be an open-borders Socialist.
It sounds like John Birch
Actually, a Rudy/Thompson 08 ticket would be the best thing going right now.
A ticket with Thompson and Hunter on it would be a good one, I think.
Either way it would be the top ticket we have a chance to see this time around.
A fair question. Thompson seems to have the ability to learn from mistakes, something I haven't seen that much in the Bush Admin - they keep making the same boneheaded political mistakes again and again, to their detriment.
On the whole, I'd say Fred is somewhere between Reagan and Bush on the political scale. He is SOLIDLY pro-gun and he has a solid pro-life voting record, despite attempts by the Rudy and Romney camps to paint him as pro-choice. He also is enforcement-first when it comes to illegal immigration, which IMO is the most sane approach no matter what your opinion as to how to handle the illegals already here.
Then, if you compare him to the three current front-runners, he looks downright magisterial.
BTTT...
* Fred Thompson has blasted more people in the face with a shotgun than even Dick Cheney.
* The masked executioner of Saddam Hussein: Fred Thompson.
* Every night before going to sleep, Osama bin Laden checks under his bed for Fred Thompson.
* Fred Thompson took over what was Al Gore's Senate seat, thereby dramatically reducing the Senate's carbon footprint. Fred Thompson then created carbon offset offsets by wastefully burning hippies.
* Fred Thompson reconsidered running for reelection after 9/11 but later decided to handle things on his own. He was soon seen entering the Middle East with a bottle of tequila in one hand an a handgun in the other. They're still counting the dead.
* Fred Thompson once ended a filibuster by ripping out a Senator's heart and showing it to him before he died.
* The actual cause of global warming: Fred Thompson's burning rage.
* Fred Thompson once stood on our south border and glared at Mexico. There was no illegal immigration for a month.
* Scientists predict that when Fred Thompson dies he'll explode taking out the five nearest planets before collapsing into a black hole.
* If you purchase a weather radio, it will wake you up with an alarm to warn you when Fred Thompson is pissed off.
* Webster's Dictionary defines "conservatism" as "how closely one's views resemble those of Fred Thompson."
* Fred Thompson's sense of strategy is so great that he can checkmate you using only a pawn and a knight.
* When terrorists get to the afterlife, they'll find that none of their seventy-two women are still virgins. Why? Because of Fred Thompson.
* Why does Iran want nuclear weapons? Out of fear of Fred Thompson.
Tancredo/Paul or Paul/Tancredo would make an excellent team to reverse the tsunami of Third Worlders invading our country, although I admit I would love to see our great Christian patriot Buchanan leading the team.
It had been used for a long time to identify social liberals but fiscally conservatives. But since the Iraq War, liberals have twisted the word into meaning pro-War.
There is a key difference between Fred and the others. A prime example with Rudy is his saying he would support a PBA ban with exceptions for the life of the mother when he supported Clinton's veto of such a ban. Rudy never addresses his past view, just expects us to accept that he now believes a certain way.
Fred, in discussing his rationale for supporting CFR, gave his reasons why he thought it was needed, clearly states that he was wrong and that CFR doesn't work, and states a more conservative approach of immediate full disclosure. Meanwhile, Rudy hasn't even addressed his past support of CFR, so we have to assume he still supports such. Advantage Fred.
And beyond that, in several key areas such as abortion and gun rights, Fred doesn't have to re-position himself like Rudy and Romney - his voting record on both is outstanding.
Fred Thompson is extremely articulate and will do an excellent job of educating the voters on conservatism. He has humor, excellent verbal delivery and gravitas.
I dream of a TV debate between Fred and Mrs. Bill Clinton.
And if we want to speak about negatives, then Ron Paul has to bear a lot of scrutinty. Ron Paul is part of the pro-surrender crowd. He basically has the foreign policy plans of a 6-year old girl who believes everything she sees when mommy watches CNN. Ron Paul, additionally, is a libertarian, not a conservative, which means he can't really be trusted on most of the social issues that count for anything, aside from gun control. How's he stand on the borders? Most libertarians tend to be open-borders supporters, or at least tend to waver on this issue, because their impulses impel them to believe that "individuals have the right to freely go where they can get the most compensation for their labour", regardless of pesky things like laws and national sovereignty.
Tom Tancredo, I like. But he would have zero chance of winning a national election, even if the Dims nominated Dennis "Space Cowboy" Kucinich, because he is widely perceived by the general population as being a wacko, and even by Republicans as being a one-hit wonder.
I don't listen to organizations that lump legal and illegal immigration policies into the same group.
Thompson must be getting pretty popular, judging from the attacks I'm reading about today.
I'll assume you're joking. our great Christian patriot Buchanan
I'll assume you're joking here, too.
Nuff said.
I dream of a TV debate between Fred and Mrs. Bill Clinton.
D; and on interior enforcement
Baf-d, bad.
Evidence, please?
I can find three votes by Fred regarding affirmative action, and it's a mixed bag:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm
Voted NO on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business. (Oct 1997)
Voted NO on banning affirmative action hiring with federal funds. (Jul 1995)
On the other hand, he has resisted the efforts to make gays a special protected class:
Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)
I'd say Fred's a wash here.
See post 44 - evaluation of votes from the website On the Issues
Ron Paul? Really?
Ise Fred Thompson beating Hellary in Ohio, Penn. and Florida?
Fred Thompson was out of the Senate before illegal immigration hit the fan. His term was up in 2002/3.
The larger "fish or cut bait" positions on immigration came in about 2004/5. (Not that it hadn't been an issue up to that point, but not with the conservative intensity it now has.)
In short, Thompson gets to spell out his position. I'm expecting him to stake out a real fence/real enforcement type of position.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.