Posted on 07/23/2007 6:04:09 AM PDT by 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
Make sure to post it! :)
If only you could be so lucky.
Slow news day?
Fred T voted for McCain-Feingold and now runs and hides. Romney is out there boldly working his tail off on the campaign trail.
So, we have Mitt to blame when our favorite television shows are pre-empted by speed skating time trials?
Good to know...good to know. :)
Fred was just lucky he was not in the last debate. He’d be tarred forever as being from the Kennedy wing of the party.
So far there are zero detailed responses from the Fredheads on why Ft is worthy.
I’ll offer one. He’s well known from appearing in movies like Die Hard 2 and as a regular character on LA Law. Counts for something in tems of name recognition.
As for the rest of his record and career......
I’m still waiting for the chatter to settle down. I’m sure the list of rreasosn will be substantial. ;o)
We do have some lovely parting gifts for you though.
I think its a good thing for Fred to have waited. Give em a chance to gin up some answers to some dangling issues before the his bebutante party.
Stuff it, RudyBooster. Fred Thompson’s ‘worthiness’ has been the topic of hundreds, if not thousands of threads here at FreeRepublic.
We don’t feel any need to repeat it just because mittant and pissant tell us we should. We won’t do it for the NYC drag queen either.
Fred was one of those who helped Bill Clinton get off the hook during impeachment. Romney wasn’t one of those. Refer to: “Sell Out” by David Schippers. Fred “sold out” by letting Clinton off the hook on the perjury count - and we all know Bill Clinton lied under oath. We all know that. Hello!
I hate to break the news to you but Duncan Hunter is not really running for President unlike his supporters he’s smart enough to know he’s not gonna win. What he is running for is a cabinet post or best possible scenerio VP.
As I said Fred voted FOR McCain-Feingold. Romney did not. You cannot argue with that, FReeper pal.
Nope. If he loses, that may be the result. But trust me, he’s in it to win.
Yes, we do know that he lied under oath. Why, then wasn’t the house’s charge drawn up properly?
Fred details it quite well here:
http://www.australianpolitics.com/usa/clinton/trial/statements/thompson.shtml
I can keep knocking down your BS claims all day or you can stop making them. Your choice.
I like Duncan Hunter but this is supposed to be about why Fred T is superior to Mitt Romney - and so far, no one has a clue.
That's a lie.
Fred “sold out” by letting Clinton off the hook on the perjury count - and we all know Bill Clinton lied under oath.
Fred's point was that Clinton's perjury was not impeachable.
That is factually incorrect, and oft rebutted here on F.R.
Here is Freds’ ACTUAL (as opposed to the fictional versions so oft repeated -— generally by Ron Paul supporters) stand on the issue of Clinton’s impeachment (in Fred’s own words):
http://australianpolitics.com/usa/clinton/trial/statements/thompson.shtml
That is factually incorrect, and oft rebutted here on F.R.
Here is Freds’ ACTUAL (as opposed to the fictional versions so oft repeated -— generally by Ron Paul supporters) stand on the issue of Clinton’s impeachment (in Fred’s own words):
http://australianpolitics.com/usa/clinton/trial/statements/thompson.shtml
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.