Posted on 04/20/2007 6:02:18 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
It seems that conservatives are about to make the same mistake that they made in 2000. Every Cassandra warned the movement conservatives that GW Bush was a liberal, but they were all duped by his "compassionate conservatism," which we since have learned really means "liberal globalism."
Now, despite all the warnings, they are about to be conned by Fred Thompson too - another neocon (aka liberal globalist). Will they get what they deserve? Can people really be so shortsighted? In 2011 will we hear GOP cheerleaders, "If only I had known...."
Let's look at Fred Thompson on the issues.
First and foremost, let's ponder immigration, the greatest threat facing the West today. As Jean Raspail foretold in Camp of the Saints, the "best conservative novel ever written," a third-world invasion of the West is taking place, and we must make a stand - before it is too late.
Although tough talking on border control, Fred Thompson has a rather weak record from his time in the Senate. Americans for Better Immigration only gave him a career grade of C. And on chain migration, visa lotteries, reducing unnecessary visas, asylum fraud, and reducing amnesties, he received rather low marks.
Thompson is almost certainly pro-abortion, regardless what he feigns. He has said, "The ultimate decision must be made by the woman." In other words, he believes it's a "choice."
Thompson is pro-affirmative action, and his two votes in the Senate guaranteed that under-qualified minorities would be given preference over Euro-Americans (i.e. white people). Thompson obviously believes that victimology should trump hard work.
And like all neocons, Thompson supports free trade, which is destroying our economy and undermining our sovereignty. Historically, conservatives opposed free trade, and they should; it's national suicide. But Thompson like many GOP cheerleaders has been "neoconned" on this issue.
In foreign policy, Fred Thompson is an adamant neocon globalist. He is a fellow at the neocon American Enterprise Institute, and a member of the neocon / neoliberal Council on Foreign Relations, which supports the creation of a North American Union and the eradication of American sovereignty.
In short, Fred Thompson is no real conservative. He's a neocon globalist. Only look at his past actions, memberships and words.
We already have three real conservatives in the running (Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, and Duncan Hunter) and let's give them the support they deserve. If Fred Thompson receives the nomination, I'm voting Constitution Party.
I would like to hear Fred to explain why he voted not to ban affirmative action in 1995. However last year I voted here in Michigan for DeVos, and he was against the banning of Affirmative action that was also on our ballot when he ran. Hmm...maybe thats why he lost.
However I will still vote for Fred, he probably voted against it for some Federal reason.
Flip-flopping means changing your position on issues.
It doesn’t mean that, if you try a policy and it fails, you recognize that it failed and look for something better.
I have no doubt that Fred Thompson still supports “cleaning up” the campaign finance system. I’m not sure I support that because of what it usually means. But he now says that he thinks a better way to do that might be to just have instant disclosure of all contributions and let anybody give anything they want. In other words, he’s changed his view of what ACTION would work, but still has the same philosophy and goal.
BTW, even though I give him a “pass” on this now, his ability to push legislation that so clearly violated my right to political speech simply to pursue his goal of “cleaning up politics” is bothersome to me, even if he actually refuted it which he has not.
I like Romney better on the CFR issue. McCain, Rudy, and Thompson aren’t strong on Campaign Finace Reform. But at least Thompson has admitted his solution isn’t working and has expressed a willingness to try something else that will work.
First of all, 1972 was before Reagan even coined the "11th Commandment".
More importantly, I'm sure Reagan would never have expected that his words would be twisted to say that party loyalty trumps the rule of law and the prosecution of corruption.
If you want to dishonor Reagan's memory by invoking him to excuse corruption, then that's your business.
BeckB wrote: “So he is pro affirmative action. I was feeling some doubts due to his stance on Campaign Finance. Now I am convinced. He doesn’t sound like a conservative.”
Are you a two-issue conservative?
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.
That’s conservative enough for me. And it is obviously resonating with large numbers of other conservatives as well.
As for those who can’t see the forest for the tress, too bad.
At this point I think maybe he could make a gaffe. Any news would be better than what he has now. I almost suggested he should have taken on James Moran on the VT shooting response. Nobody else on our side wanted to because of the “sensitivity” since Moran is from Virginia (fortunately our Democrat Governor kind of attacked him implicitly).
So if Duncan had gone after Moran personally, he would have gotten Press, a lot of it negative, but then he’d get called on talk shows to “explain himself” and could give his pro-2nd-amendment speech and talk about how everybody wanted a gun in those classrooms and how he trusts most americans to be safe with firearms and to act responsibly.
In other words, maybe he needed a little controversy so that the media wanted him to show up on their stations. Right now I think the typical news chief would groan if he had to put Hunter on a show, knowing it would probably hurt the ratings.
I made a statement regarding not voting for a conservative; not about Fred Thompson.
If I had a nickel for every political candidate who had been anointed with the magic "he can win" salve and didn't, I would be a wealthy man. I do have to admit that watching the earnest True Believers talking themselves into all sorts of inane ideas never looses its power to amuse.
Anybody who read what Fred just wrote about VT and gun control cannot possibly say, with a straight face, he is a liberal. He may not be conservative enough for everyone, but he is a conservative - not a liberal.
That should read not vote for a liberal. Oops
I did not mean to imply either way. I was seeking clarification on where you stood on Thompson.
WOW!!!
Either him or Duncan Hunter then. At this point I’d say he is doing better in the polls than Hunter who has actually declared himself.
But they are both great Americans.
Looks like a hit piece by the REAL one-percenter crowd. Not the “one-percenters” the Rudybots talk about (who really comprise about 70% of the conservative movement...)
:)
I knew Fred would address it.
Yeah, right.
So, it is a feign to have a 100% pro-life voting record? When asked point-blank by Chris Wallace, Fred answered "Pro-Life" immediately, unequivocably, unhesitatingly, and succinctly but we are to believe that was a feign?
What a dufus. Some people are willfully ignorant.
If Rudy wins, which gown will he wear to the Inaugural Ball?
[Those pix of Rudy in various dresses are not going to make the rest of the world perceive him very well.]
Red herring. It’s more campesinos in Mexico and prison and slave labor in China I’m concerned about than whether Japan is selling below market. We will never be successful competing against slave and serf labor, and we shouldn’t be condoning it even if we could.
“pat buchanan is a moron...”
Be nice to Pat. As we all know, Pat lost his father in a concentration camp during WWII.
(He fell out of the gaurd tower.)
/yes, yes, I know it’s old./
So... you know you've lost the "flip-flopper" argument, and now you shift to arguing with me by... agreeing with me? (See #75)
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.