Lights, Camera . . . Candidacy?

OpinionJournal.com ^ | March 17, 2007 | John Fund

[M. Thatcher]

You calling John a "newbie"?! Let's get the record straight ace. John has probably been here as long as you or I. Condescencion doesn't fit you right, Old-timer...

Oh, get a grip - it was ribbing amongst oldies. Hence, the wink afterwards. (And he IS a "newbie" compared to me: I've been here since January 1998, almost two years longer than he has...LOL)

I was responding to his "welcome to Free Republic," which I also took as a joke.

[SE Mom]

An absolute MUST READ article for anyone interested in Fred Thompson.

He is -gasp- HONEST.

Reading this clarified why I've always liked this man- he says what HE thinks, it comes from inside him- he's not spouting the latest cause de jour. He is the REAL DEAL.

Run, Fred, RUN!!!

[LowCountryJoe]

Mr. Thompson has also been criticized for failing to back some comprehensive tort-reform bills because of his background as a trial lawyer. Here he insists his stance was based on grounds of federalism. "I'm consistent. I address Federalist Society meetings," he says, noting that more issues should be left to the states.

Mr. Thompson says he can compete with Democrats in talking plainly about the anxiety many Americans have about the economy, despite good macro numbers. "Someone who is 18 today may well have 10 employers in their career," he says. "That's completely different from how their parents lived. I would address that insecurity and help people adapt without shooting ourselves in the foot with protectionism and income redistribution. I had 10 employers before I finished law school."

Yes, but can the social conservatives stand for these viewpoints? I don't think that they'll be able to. Economic ignorance and the proper role of the federal government (read the 9th and 10th articles of the Bill of Rights if you have doubts) is completely lost on far too many that are right-of-center with their politics.

Many FReepers in their heart of hearts know that what I am writing here is true; they may even be the guilty ones I am trying to identify.

[Graymatter]

This is a must-read!!
And after you read Fund's interview of FT, you KNOW Fred is running.

[TYVets]

Even more interesting if FT does.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

You'll notice how Thompson has the Rudy supporters in a blind panic.

They should be. Up until now Rudy was my choice (given that Duncan Hunter wasn't gaining any traction) until Thompson entered. He's been my favorite politician for years.

Thompson for POTUS. I like it.

[Josh Painter]

screaming eagle2 wrote: "The perfect ticket....Thompson/Watts....what do y'all think."

I think it's an outstanding ticket! And it has balance:

It has a Southeasterner teamed with a Midwesterner. Well, Eufala is in the NW part of Oklahoma *Grin*.

It teams a law school grad with a journalism school grad.

It teams a former Senator who is also a successful actor with a former Congressman who is also a sucessful businessman and entrepreneur.

It teams a member of the Church of Christ with a Baptist youth minister.

And, best of all, it teams a good ol' boy with a... Oklahoma Sooners football hero, LOL!

Seriously, after hearing JC express his distaste for some of the things he had to endure in politics, I thought he would never want to get back into the game. But, since he's one of those who is pushing Fred very hard to run, all Fred has to do is say, "Okay JC, I'll do it, but only under one condition - you have to agree to be my running mate." I don't think JC could refuse Fred under those circumstances.

The Dems are in fear and loathing over a Thompson run. A Thompson-Watts run would destroy them!

JC could make history as the nation's first Black vice president and eight years later as it's first Black president! It's time for the party of Lincoln to put it's money where its mouth is on wanting to appeal to Black Americans.

Run Fred, run!
Run with him, JC, run with him!

[SE Mom]

Very nice summation SR, I concur! It would be an unbeatable ticket:)

[Josh Painter]

Nice bumper sticker. May I steal it? Only without the blinking, LOL!

[Josh Painter]

M. Thatcher wrote: "Good grief. The constant conspiracy crap on this forum is bizarre."

So are the DU-DU sock puppets.

They're obsessed with us, LOL!

[Josh Painter]

LowCountryJoe wrote: "Yes, but can the social conservatives stand for these viewpoints?"

Let's see now... the social conservative part of me has no problem with those viewposts. Stand by one, while I check with the fiscal conservative part of me...

No, it's kewl with that, too.

Run, Fred and J.C., run!

[SE Mom]

Here's a pic for the men:

http://movies.msn.com/celebs/celeb.aspx?c=335715&stab=1&vpid=139825

[Politicalmom]

Apparently, we social conservatives are considered to be too stupid to walk and chew gum at the same time.

I am socially AND fiscally conservative, but I won't put my wallet above someone else's right to life.

[papasmurf]

Thanks! She is a hottie, and they make a good looking couple, too.

:O)

p

[papasmurf]

I've posted similar sentiment, but, you did a better job of it. :) Thanks.

Of course, I'm one of those who feels the racial divide in this Country is one of our biggest problems. It's a main motivator for the high crime and failure rate in our youth, as well.

I've been a JC fan for many years, and a Fred fan even longer. IMO, there isn't a better possible combination to had for 2008.

My Sister visits the Church JC attends, and is going to trying to pass him a message for us.

:O)

P

[LowCountryJoe]

Then I guess you were not the droids I was looking for...move along.

[Josh Painter]

papasmurf wrote: "My Sister visits the Church JC attends, and is going to trying to pass him a message for us."

That would be outstanding!

[The Pack Knight]

Finally got around to reading this one. What really caught my eye was the part continuing from the first paragraph you posted (emphasis mine)..

"I'm consistent. I address Federalist Society meetings," he says, noting that more issues should be left to the states. For example, he cast the lonely "nay" in 99-1 votes against a national 0.8% blood alcohol level for drivers, a federal law banning guns in schools, and a measure limiting the tort liability of Good Samaritans. "Washington overreaches, and by doing so ends up not doing well the basics people really care about." Think Katrina and Walter Reed.

I'd forgotten about those votes. Part of me always respects the one man who casts the lone vote against an overwhelmingly popular bill, even when that vote is wrong and informed by kooky ideas. In these cases, however, Fred was dead on right. If Fred really runs on his federalist principles and articulates them with conviction, I might just have to change my tagline. No President has even spoken of returning power to the states since Reagan, and even he did little to act on it. If Fred Thompson can do that, he'll have proven to me at least that he's more than just "electable".

[streetpreacher]

You're such a shill for Rudy and NARAL that no one on this forum even takes you seriously anymore. If and when Thompson secures the nomination and the presidency, will you just slink away back under your rock?

[streetpreacher]

The "coy" card. I can see that you and FairOpinion have worked out the talking points.