Fred Thompson Supporters: How is Fred Superior?

Electromneyin2008 ^ | 7/22/07 | Vic Lundquist

[pissant]

In the last six months or so, when my Democrat friends have engaged me in discussions about Hillary Clinton, at some point I usually ask them a simple question to gage their support, knowledge, and level of commitment to their candidate. The question is, “What has Senator Clinton accomplished in her life, in her career to qualify her to be President of the United States?”. And of course they know who I support and they generally know his amazing credentials and experience, so when I press them for answers to, “What has she actually done that sets her apart?”, I almost always get a totally blank stare, with no reply.

So I got to thinking about Fred Thompson. Many people are discussing Fred Thompson’s imminent entry into the Republican race for the nomination. More importantly, there are those who back him in that race. It is they to whom this blog post is directed; it is not directed to those visitors who are committed to Mitt Romney. I am only looking to the true Fred Thompson supporters for comments to be left on this post.

There are a number of questions that come to mind for any FT supporter to answer, such as:

– Why is Senator Thompson the superior candidate to be the Republican nominee in 2008? Specifics. – What specific leadership qualities make him superior to Mitt Romney? – What specific leadership experience qualifies Senator Thompson as superior to Mitt Romney? – We know the dozens of huge successes in Mitt’s career. What specific successes in Senator Thompson’s life or career are superior to those of Mitt Romney?

Please feel free to leave any comments you wish as long as they are specific. Your comments can be both objective (measurable) or subjective (qualitative).

To assist you in crafting your answers, here are some examples. An example of an objective answer to the above questions regarding Mitt Romney for instance is that “he has been an executive; a leader of large entities most of his career.” Another example of an objective answer is, “Thompson is an actor; Romney is not.” An example of a subjective answer, again referring to Mitt Romney, would be that “he is a better communicator than Senator Thompson”.

Poor or non-answers are things like, “Well, I just like him better!”. Though obviously subjective, that answer has no meaning except that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”

This is a perfect opportunity and forum for all FT supporters to show the rest of us why their candidate is the best. Here is a forum in which many who visit this site either support Mitt Romney for President, or the visitors here are considering Mitt Romney’s strengths and attributes in relation to the possibility he might be the be the best candidate. So here is a perfect place for all supporters of Senator Thompson to come on over and give us all the specific reasons FT is more qualified than Governor Romney to be the chief executive of the largest entity in the world and in world history.

All I ask is that in your comments, you be very specific and provide facts where possible. You have obviously chosen to back, support, and promote Senator Thompson for President. You obviously believe Fred Thompson is superior to Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney and should be our (Republicans’) choice to run against the Democrat challenger. As you present your arguments, answers, and comments, please qualify them by answering the “why” question.

Your comments should be completely positive. What do I mean here? Your answers are about Senator Thompson and his superiority; this is not a forum to tear down and to be negative. If you would rather tear down or criticize any other candidates, including Mitt Romney, please go to another site. If you choose to leave comments of a negative nature, we may delete them. Please leave all the positive comments you wish in favor of Fred Thompson, but again, please be very specific and be clear as to how they are in fact superior by comparison and contrast. This is very simple.

Fred Thompson supporters: This is your opportunity to show us all why Fred Thompson the man, the leader, is superior to Mitt Romney.

~ Vic

[ellery]

I’ve posted these to you before; here they are again.

He may have voted for the balanced budget amendment, but then he voted to kill a bill that would have provided for meaningful enforcement:

Budget Enforcement Act of 1997
H.R.2003

Title: To reform the budget process and enforce the bipartisan balanced budget agreement of 1997.

Bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:h.r.02003:

Vote: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1997/roll300.xml

Then when the bill wasn’t killed, Hunter voted against it:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1997/roll301.xml

---

Then in 2000, he bucked the GOP and voted against another bill that aimed to meaningfully enforce the balanced budget amendment:

Comprehensive Budget Process Reform Act
H.R.853

Title: To amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to provide for joint resolutions on the budget, reserve funds for emergency spending, strengthened enforcement of budgetary decisions, increased accountability for Federal spending, accrual budgeting for Federal insurance programs, mitigation of the bias in the budget process toward higher spending, modifications in paygo requirements when there is an on-budget surplus, and for other purposes.

Bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.00853:

Vote: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2000/roll189.xml

---

He also bucked the GOP in 2004 and joined with a party-line democrat vote against the Spending Control Act:

Spending Control Act
H R 4663

Title: To amend part C of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to establish discretionary spending limits and a pay-as-you-go requirement for mandatory spending. (Note: this was the republican version of “pay-as-you-go” - it only applied to cutting spending to pay for other spending, and did not provide for raising taxes to pay for spending)

Bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR04663:@@@L&summ2=m&;>;

Vote: http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2004&rollnumber=318

[pissant]

Tapdancing Example:

LA TIMES - Fred lobbied pro abort group

Fred Spokesman - Me talk to Fred. “Never happened. Period”, no billing records yada yada

Story flies all over blogosphere: Fred lobby for pro abort group

Fred on Powerline: Backpedals from denial. Don’t mix up lawyerin with personal opinion. Does not correct his spokesman’s earlier blanket denial.

NY TImes: Finds billing records

Fred: No speak, spokesman: tapdance.

If he had been this pro lifer he would have remembered talking 22 times with teh gal running an abortionist outfit.

[hoosierpearl]

Fred recognized early that Hillary was not worthy of being noticed [from his book At This Point In Time]. Hillary’s name is not mentioned although most of the staffers are mentioned. That makes him intelligent and astute.

Fred treats his wives with great respect [from At This Point In Time] and from interviews that mention Jeri.

Fred is prolife and has been as long as I have been. Fred votes by his principles [Federalism, prolife, limited government].

Fred has done extensive work on limiting the size of government.[committee reports on OCLC] His article on civil service [relating to limited government].

Fred’s work on fighting corruption [Watergate as found in At This Point In Time, Marie Ragghianti and governor Blanton as found in Marie by Peter Maas, case of Cpl. Lance Fielder as found on OCLC].

Fred’s resume listing the bills he has worked on. [Thomas.gov, Sturm Rugers website]

Fred’s work on foreign relations and nuclear proliferation.

Fred’s writings show intelligence, organization, thoughtfulness and his character. He watches what he says about others and thinks about what he says. Most evident in At This Point In Time.

People who know him well recommend Fred highly.

Fred knows a lot about Hillary that he hasn’t talked about yet.

Fred’s ethics and character as spoken about by people who know him well [Lance Fielder’s family, Marie Ragghianti, Sarah Lindsey, friends from his hometown, etc]. You can tell by this book.

I trust Fred’s judgment [from reading his commentaries, his book, from Marie by Peter Maas].

Fred has a longer history to track and to go by than some of the other candidates. Gives you more to rate.

Fred’s work at getting John Roberts through the Senate.

I could go on, but I have other things to do.

[Clara Lou]

Do you never tire of looking ridiculous? This has been dealt with completely. Try to read back and remember...remember...remember. If you can’t, go back over this weekend’s threads. What a desperate man you are.

[RatsDawg]

Of course he changed his heart on the abortion issue. Before it might not have been a big deal, just business as usaul.

[pissant]

I get nothing for either of your first two thomas links. Just like last time. LOL. Not sure what you are doing wrong. But if you can’t link I will look up later.

[Politicalmom]

I have run into the same link problem. Some of them seem to be temporary.

[pissant]

If Fred says he has always been pro life, he’s gonna tank. You better hope fredheads have been misattributing that. It will all come out in the wash.

[kevkrom]

I get nothing for either of your first two thomas links. Just like last time. LOL. Not sure what you are doing wrong.

Thomas searches expire automatically (and quickly) -- it's generally not wise to post them as web links, as they usually won't be available when someone tries to click them.

[Clara Lou]

You have better luck talking to a fence post.

[RatsDawg]

He is not going to tank, he changed his heart. He was Libertarian on it before, but now is more Conservative. I don’t see the problem.

[ontap]

That’s what lawyers do.

[pissant]

Thanks for that tip. I had not noticed that before.

[pissant]

I don’t either, but you might want to tell Clara lou and Hoosierpearl that bit of info before they drive themselves batty. LOL

[Clara Lou]

Oh, gee. You’ve been talking about that for the longest. And NOW, weeks later, you’re hot on the trail. Golly, I’m so worried. Watch out folks, pissant is getting ready to take Thompson out. Then EVERYONE will turn to Duncan Hunter as their political lord and savior. Right???

[pissant]

I just said I don’t know for sure that Fred made that statement. His minions like you have been though.

[ontap]

There’s probably more on Duncan Hunter than Pissant knows. People don’t spend a lot of time trying to discredit a candidate with a 1.5% poll.

[pissant]

Only problem is, I’ve already done the research. LOL.

[ellery]

And, his votes in favor of the most massive entitlement expansion of our generation, the Medicare Prescription Drug entitlement:

Medicare RX of 2000 Act
Bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.04680:

Vote: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2000/roll357.xml

---

Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act

Bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.r.00001:

Vote: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2003/roll332.xml