Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Fred Thompson? Here are my top ten reasons.
Southwest Missouri for Fred Thompson ^ | September 8, 2007 | Sturm Ruger

Posted on 09/08/2007 5:46:57 AM PDT by Josh Painter

Rich Lowry’s latest column asks, “Why Fred?”

In the op ed, Lowry attempts to head off some possible answers to his question by arguing that Fred’s adherence to federalist principles doesn’t count. It most certainly does, as it is one of the guiding principles upon which a Thompson presidency would be built. Lowry also cites the “forward-looking” health-care proposals offered up by Thompson rivals Romney and Giuliani as the kind of “fresh thinking” that Thompson will have to demonstrate.

Um, sorry, Rich, but those health care plans are the kind of “fresh thinking” that is morphing the Republican Party into Democrat Lite. But rather than digress into a paragraph-by-paragraph critique of Lowry’s article, let me simply offer up my top ten reasons why Fred Thomspon is a better choice for conservatives than Rudy McRomney:

10. Because a review of Fred Dalton Thompson’s voting record shows that he consistently voted for gun owners (the NRA called him a “staunch supporter of the Second Amendment”), against abortion, for business, against higher taxes, for a balanced budget, for a strong defense, for ANWR drilling, for capping foreign aid, for free trade, for private property rights, for personal retirement accounts, for the Iraq War Resolution and for welfare reform.

9. Because, among his interest group ratings, Sen. Thompson earned a perfect zero from National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action, a perfect 100% from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, only 11% from the ACLU, 85% from the American Conservative Union, 86% from the Center for Security Policy, a perfect zero from the American Federation of Teachers, 6% from the National Education Association, 90% from the League of Private Property Voters, 97% from the National Tax Limitation committee, 88% from the National Taxpayers Union and a perfect zero from the liberal ADA. In a 1995 analysis, Project Vote Smart listed Thompson as having supported Contract With America items 100% of the time. The Club for Growth has just released a a report in which Club President Pat Toomey concludes, “Fred Thompson’s eight-year record is generally pro-growth with an excellent record on entitlement reform and school choice and a very good record on taxes, regulation, and trade. His belief in a limited federal government is demonstrated by his numerous votes against government intrusion in the private sector and increased federal spending. His fondness for Tennessee pork aside, Thompson consistently voted against increased spending and new government projects, at times, one of only a handful of senators to do so.”

8. Because under his Chairmanship, Sen. Thompson’s Governmental Affairs Committee actively pursued an agenda aimed at producing a smaller, more efficient, and more accountable government. Of his efforts, the Kingsport Times-News wrote, “Sen. Thompson is to be applauded for keeping a watchful eye over Washington fiscal matters. There should be more like him.” Chairman Thompson held hearings on improving the federal regulatory process; reforming the IRS; exploring ways to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse; and a number of national security issues, including the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and missile technologies. Thompson also investigated and successfully enacted solutions to information management problems such as government computer security.

7. Because as a member of the powerful Senate Committee on Finance, Thompson focused on reducing taxes, reforming the tax code to make it simpler and fairer, and restoring the Social Security and Medicare programs to long-term solvency. He advocated a balanced approach to trade and national security and pushed for an export control policy that protects our country’s national security without unnecessarily burdening American industry with bureaucratic red tape. He also proposed legislation to curb the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction by China and other countries and to strengthen the United States’ response to such activities.

6. Because when Thompson makes the rare mistake, he admits it and learns from it. Though he’s rightly still not comfortable with the idea of people giving large sums of money to legislators and then coming before their committees to ask for the government’s favor, FDT has owned up to the fact that that McCain Feingold was a poor attempt to solve the problem of influence peddling and just plain old bribery. He’s learned that full disclosure might just be the best way to deal with the probelm. Fred has also admitted that his vote for the immigration reform measure which President Reagan signed in 1986 created an additional 12 to 20 million illegals. He’s learned from that and has grown much tougher on the issue, advocating the securing of our borders before anything else is done and the deportation of illegals when they are captured.

5. Because Fred Thompson has been committed to federalist principles his entire political career and has brought federalism to the forefront of the current political dialogue. He has also been a voice in the wilderness speaking out about the coming entitlement and national debt crisis, calling for a frank discussion of how we must deal with it. Thompson stands apart from the other major Republican presidential candidates who have been for the most part silent on these issues.

4. Because Sen. Thompson has the admiration and respect of his former colleagues on the hill. As president, he would have the best chance of all the candidates to get the congressional cooperation required to advance his agenda. FDT has demonstrated this kind of leadership with his very successful shepherding of John Roberts through the political minefield that is the U.S. Senate.

3. Because he scares the devil out of leftists. Even the liberal Washington Monthly in a 1999 hit piece had to begrudgingly admit that as a Senator, Thompson worked hard to keep his campaign promises. Democratic strategist Bob Beckel revealed, in a discussion on Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes program, that Fred Thompson for president would be their “worst nightmare” because of his communications skills and ability to appeal to swing voters. Many backers of Fred’s GOP opponents attack him even more viciously than the Democrats do because he poses a major threat to their candidates now that he’s in the race.

2. Because he doesn’t scare independents and Reagan Democrats. Like Reagan, Thompson is that rare sort of conservative who can sell conservative ideas to moderates and independents. And again like Reagan, he may be the only potential candidate who can unite the factions of the Republican Party right now. No, Fred isn’t Ronald Reagan, and he’s the first one to say it. But he is one of Reagan’s smartest students and most consistent disciples who has the same kind of media-savvy and commanding presence. Also like Reagan, Fred Thompson is much more than “just an actor.”

1. Because he will beat Hillary Clinton like a rented mule.

That’s why Fred Thomspon.


TOPICS: Government; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: 2008; campaign; fredheads; fredthompson; gop; hillarycare; nomination; reaganesque; republicans; rudymcromney; socializedmedicine; thompsondemocrats
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last
To: hoosierpearl
Its a 34-minute 37-second interview, first up. Followed by the death of Howard Cosell.

Video Link: Charlie Rose Interview with Fred Thompson, Apr.24,1995

Fred does say, he is "a conservative" on that video. That was 12 years ago. Fred`s still a conservative today. And when the choices are between a liberal, a centrist, a moderate or a conservative, I know who I'm gonna vote for.

41 posted on 09/08/2007 9:57:37 AM PDT by Reagan Man (FUHGETTABOUTIT Rudy....... Conservatives don't vote for liberals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sturm Ruger

“Beat Hillary Clinton like a rented mule”

I’m savin that one!!!!


42 posted on 09/08/2007 10:02:06 AM PDT by djf (Send Fred some bread! Not a whole loaf, a slice or two will do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sturm Ruger

Could you clarify #6? Fred didn’t vote for the 1986 immigration bill.


43 posted on 09/08/2007 10:05:09 AM PDT by Politicalmom (Of the potential GOP front runners, FT has one of the better records on immigration.- NumbersUSA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sturm Ruger
>>>>>>5. Because Fred Thompson has been committed to federalist principles his entire political career and has brought federalism to the forefront of the current political dialogue.

Fred`s a solid conservative with tons of gravitas, but its his support for Federalism that sets him apart from his GOP opponents. Fred wants to resurrect Reagan's Executive Order #12612, which ordered each government entity look at ways to adhere to the Founder's ideas of original intent, aka. federalism.

President Reagan EO #12612, Federalism, October 26, 1987:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, and in order to restore the division of governmental responsibilities between the national government and the States that was intended by the Framers of the Constitution and to ensure that the principles of federalism established by the Framers guide the Executive departments and agencies in the formulation and implementation of policies, it is hereby ordered as follows:

44 posted on 09/08/2007 10:06:31 AM PDT by Reagan Man (FUHGETTABOUTIT Rudy....... Conservatives don't vote for liberals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
This is called:


45 posted on 09/08/2007 10:10:12 AM PDT by W04Man (I'm Now With Fred http://Vets4Fred.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Politicalmom; 2ndDivisionVet; ejonesie22; SandRat; Clara Lou; hoosierpearl
Have you seen, or heard, this?

Great!
46 posted on 09/08/2007 10:38:17 AM PDT by papasmurf (I'm for Free, Fair, and Open trade. America needs to stand by it's true FRiend. Israel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: papasmurf
Just outstanding! What a fabulous video! Thanks for letting me know about it. The message is great. (The music is too.)

=Go FRed=

47 posted on 09/08/2007 10:44:14 AM PDT by Clara Lou (I support FDT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou
Reason #1 is the cherry on top of the 1st 9.

: D

Just wait though, now that he has joined the race, he will be portrayed as the most despicable, under a rock resident degenerate that humanity has ever experienced via the MSM.

48 posted on 09/08/2007 10:46:18 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
If I can’t have Hunter, I’ll take Fred for sure.

Yep!

My mindset also and it doesn't even have to be a step backwards into RINOism to do so.

49 posted on 09/08/2007 10:49:50 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
he will be portrayed as the most despicable, under a rock resident degenerate that humanity has ever experienced via the MSM.
We'll be ready when that happens, because we've had lots of practice. After all, FDT's been attacked over and over right here at FR by the 1%er-supporters and the Rudy McRomneys.

=[Go FRed]=

50 posted on 09/08/2007 10:52:19 AM PDT by Clara Lou (I support FDT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
I just do not think guys like Baker and Thompson are the most conservative out there and are therefore, not the best choices out there.

But no candidate is "the most conservative out there" on every issue. Thompson has a solid record on illegal immigration, and a great record on foreign policy -- both prerequisites for me. But he's also much more conservative than Hunter on cutting spending, fighting entitlements and over-regulation, and returning Constitutionally dubious federal power to the states. Both are good men and good candidates -- I don't think it's accurate to term one or the other "the one true conservative."

51 posted on 09/08/2007 11:05:15 AM PDT by ellery (I don't remember a constitutional amendment that gives you the right not to be identified-R.Giuliani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ellery
...returning Constitutionally dubious federal power to the states.

A sirens song so pleasing to my ears!

52 posted on 09/08/2007 11:10:46 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Sturm Ruger
Fred has also admitted that his vote for the immigration reform measure which President Reagan signed in 1986 created an additional 12 to 20 million illegals. He’s learned from that and has grown much tougher on the issue, advocating the securing of our borders before anything else is done and the deportation of illegals when they are captured.

I thought I read a quote from him that it's impossible to deport them? Perhaps that's different than deporting them when they're arrested for another crime.

If he ends up sounding tough on illegal immigration and explains why he his votes in the Senate favored illegals, I'll consider voting for him. My jury is still out.
53 posted on 09/08/2007 11:10:46 AM PDT by CottonBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CottonBall
and explains why he his votes in the Senate favored illegals,....

To my recollection not a single Republican ever stated that they favor illegal aliens, just stating compromise to alleviate the problem without a true fix.

Fred Thompson has never taken such a stance.

54 posted on 09/08/2007 11:14:29 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
if it ends up that it is Fred T. against Hillary or any other Dem, I'll be desperately hoping for a Thompson win.

I think a Clinton-Thompson debate would be entertaining. Can you imagine that shrill, annoying, cold, screeching voice compared to Fred's calm, warm, and straightforward demeanor? She'll turn people off in seconds.
55 posted on 09/08/2007 11:14:50 AM PDT by CottonBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CottonBall; Colonel Kangaroo
Can you imagine that shrill, annoying, cold, screeching voice compared to Fred's calm, warm, and straightforward demeanor?

I can envision a lot of "I don't recall" coming from Hitlery again. ; )

56 posted on 09/08/2007 11:19:43 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
To my recollection not a single Republican ever stated that they favor illegal aliens, just stating compromise to alleviate the problem without a true fix.

True. They're not quite honest enough to state that openly. Bush still says he's not for amnesty. (It's their definition of 'amnesty' and 'illegal' that we have to figure out before knowing what they really mean.)

If he comes out sounding at least as conservative as Romney is sounding now about illegal immigration, I'll listen. But I still want those Senate votes explained. (ie., voting for chain migration, for services for illegals, and against increased employer sanctions and workplace verification pilot programs).
57 posted on 09/08/2007 11:24:24 AM PDT by CottonBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: CottonBall

There is a lot of misinformation floating around out there about all candidates and all issues. In order to clarify Thompson’s immigration stance specifically, I looked at S. 1664, the most significant immigration enforcement bill that came up during his time in the senate. Because cherrypicking factoids can easily distort the record (the reporting from Iraq is a good example of this), I catalogued every Thompson vote on every amendment that was brought to the senate floor during the debate on this bill.

Here’s my summary, followed by the actual votes so people can draw their own conclusions.

In a nutshell, Thompson voted in favor of the toughest, most-extensive anti-illegal-immigration bill that came up during his tenure in the Senate. In the debate on this bill, he voted consistently against repeated attempts to extend welfare benefits to both legal and illegal immigrants, voted against attempts to make deportation more difficult, and voted for measures that toughened border enforcement and made it easier for INS agents to arrest illegals.

He did vote against two amendments dealing with chain migration, because it had been established in the Judiciary committee that questions of legal immigration would be dealt separately from illegal immigration. He also voted against efforts to shut down debate on the Abraham amendment and implement a defacto social security national ID card for employment enforcement. Finally, he voted against establishing a $100 million employer verification office within the INS. I don’t have his own testimony to know why he voted against this, but in the floor debate there were questions about the effectiveness of the employer verification program proposed in that bill (e.g., a program that forced employers to verify all applicants could have negative implications for government intrusion into citizens’ lives; a program that only verified non-citizens would be ineffective because illegals could just claim to be citizens to avoid verification).

I’ve also learned in my research that several of the claims against Thompson related to his immigration record are misleading or outright false. For example, he did *not* vote for amnesty for Cuban and Nicaraguan illegal immigrants, as Numbers USA has reported (more information on the Mack amendment is upthread).

In addition, there have been reports slamming Thompson for voting against several Simpson amendments (e.g., claiming that he opposed Simpson’s attempt to increase penalties for falsely claiming citizenship). These claims are either ignorant or deliberate misrepresentation. What actually happened was that Teddy Kennedy tried to attach a minimim wage hike to three Simpson anti-immigration amendments. This forced Simpson — along with Thompson and the other senate republicans — to vote against his own amendments to block Kennedy’s little games.

Here are the votes:

-Thompson voted against Chafee’s proposal “to provide that the emergency benefits available to illegal immigrants also are made available to legal immigrants.” (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00106)

-Thompson voted against Graham’s amendment 3759 that would permit state and local governments to ignore federal immigration enforcement law if enforcement compliance cost more than would be saved in benefits (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00105)

-Thompson voted against Graham’s amendment 3764 that would have allowed legal immigrants who arrived before enactment of the new law to continue collecting Medicaid (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00104).

-Thompson voted against Simon’s amendment 3813 that would have made it easier for legal immigrants who arrived before enactment of the new law to collect welfare (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00103).

-Thompson voted against Simon’s amendment 3810 that would have made it easier for legal immigrants who became disabled after arriving in the US to collect welfare (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00102).

-Thompson voted against tabling/killing Abraham’s amendment that aimed to prevent use of social security cards as a national ID card (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00101)

-Thompson voted against Leahy’s amendment 3780 that would have made it harder to deport illegal immigrants who claimed persecution (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00100)

-Thompson voted against Bradley’s amendment 3790 that would establish a $100 million office of employer sanctions within the INS (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00099)

-Thompson voted for Feinstein’s amendment 3776 that would allow deportation notices to be printed in languages other than English ((http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00098)

-Thompson voted against Simon’s amendment 3809 that would have allowed legal immigrants to stay even if they had received some types of public assistance for a year or more (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00097)

-Thompson voted against Kennedy’s amendment 3816 that would have limited employers’ ability to demand additional documents for employee verification (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00096)

Thompson was absent on 4/29-4/30/96

-Thompson voted with other Republicans (including Simpson) to table Simpson’s amendment 3671 (penalties for falsely claiming citizenship) because Kennedy attempted to attach a minimum wage raise to it (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00088)

-Thompson voted with other Republicans (including Simpson) to table Simpson’s amendment 3670 (pilot program for nonimmigrant foreign students) because Kennedy attempted to attach a minimum wage raise to it (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00087)

-Thompson voted with other Republicans (including Simpson) to table Simpson’s amendment 3669 (prevention of free education for some immigrants) because Kennedy attempted to attach a minimum wage raise to it (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00086)

-Thompson voted to push the overall bill forward in a party-line vote (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00085)

-Thompson voted to table Feinstein amendment 3740 related to chain migration on the grounds that legal immigration should be addressed separately ( http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00084)

-Thompson voted against Simpson amendment 3739 related to chain migration on the grounds that legal immigration should be addressed separately (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00083)

-Thompson voted to table Dorgan’s amendment 3667 that social security should be excluded from any balanced budget amendment (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00083)

-Thompson was one of only 20 senators to vote in favor of repealing the ban on INS agents searching open fields if they have probable cause to believe an illegal act has occured (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=104&session=2&vote=00080)


58 posted on 09/08/2007 11:27:36 AM PDT by perfect_rovian_storm (John Cox 2008: Because Duncan Hunter just isn't obscure enough for me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: CottonBall
If he comes out sounding at least as conservative as Romney is sounding now about illegal immigration,...

Talk is cheap.

Look at the record of the two and compare.

There's an awful lot of "I was for it, before I was against it" that goes on when the election cycle is on the horizon.

If political rhetoric is the sole reasoning behind voting decision, heaven help us.

59 posted on 09/08/2007 11:30:26 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Afronaut
On Leno he can across as an old man that cleared his throat 4 thousand times. He looked like he just woke up.

It wasn't his finest hour, but he's had plenty of appearances that were great. Besides, even Reagan wasn't perfect onscreen either. We remember the highlights now, but he wasn't a dynamic speaker at any time. What he had was a down to earth precense, believability, and an honesty that came through. Plus a wonderful optimism and sense of humor. He got people's attention not by being polished and suave, but by being real. It's possible Fred can do that.

His first test will be the next debate. Then we'll see how he compares with the others.
60 posted on 09/08/2007 11:31:02 AM PDT by CottonBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson