I appreciate the critical questions, especially amid the Thompson lovefest (and I admit I've been excited about the prospects of a Thompson candidacy, as well). I ask myself similar questions about the others, too. No one's perfect.
Too bad so many freepers don't even take such questions seriously. I mean, you're not attacking FT. You're just asking critical questions that any serious conservative voter would have to ask.
In the end, Thompson may well get my vote if he were to run -- but I'd rather vote knowing full-well that even though he's a solid conservative, he's still a mere mortal with some notable shortcomings.
It is a shame that people are getting flamed for asking questions..
The poster is being disingenuous. The questions are taken seriously, they were just put together with the obvious intent of putting Fred in the worst possible light. It is also obvious the issues have been brought up and discuss numerous times, including on this thread already but the poster ignores those responses.
A "serious conservative voter" knows how to do research.
Believe me I would drop Fred Thompson as my personal favorite in a flash if I saw he had character traits that showed the same lame politician dishonesty and non-directness that afflicts most of the others.
Now take this for an example. Suppose another poster starts a whole thread asking questions about FDT that have already been asked and answered several times over. Here's one:
1. Is this the same Fred Thompson that voted to acquit Clinton in the Senate?
Now that question is false on its face. Because FDT voted to convict. Now that poster would then show me evidence that FDT voted to acquit Clinton on perjury and then proceed to discredit me for supporting a guy that lets a perjurer off the hook when 'everyone' knows Clinton lied.
So I would come back and say that I support FDT's analysis on why he voted to acquit Clinton on perjury and that would launch such a poster in to hyperdrive hysteria. And then I would ask did you even bother to read the analysis of this great legal intellect in the person of Senator Fred Thompson?
http://www.australianpolitics.com/usa/clinton/trial/statements/thompson.shtml
And that should shut up just about anyone that wants to flap their cyber lips about things they have no understanding of.
So I could clutter up the board with useless questions as well like:
1. Is this the same Fred Thompson that voted to convict Clinton in the Senate?
Useless, even though it is true, because it has have already been asked and answered.
FR has a search feature, a very nice and advanced one to do research with. Alot of people get on these boards and start flapping away without researching and doing their due diligence. They create clutter.
So no 'Bravo' for a Romneyite that wants to ask skewed and loaded questions about FDT just to create doubt about FDT's principles, especially questions that have already been answered.