Posted on 04/23/2007 6:09:16 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Slate's John Dickerson has a piece up (on Slate, oddly enough) giving a pretty surface-level look at why conservatives might come to have second thoughts about Fred Thompson — or, at the very least, second thoughts about crowning him the second coming of Ronald Reagan.
I think most of it is dead on, though I'm not sure any of it is fatal to a potential Thompson candidacy.
First and foremost, I think Mr. Dickerson is right about how damaging Mr. Thompson's ties to John McCain could be. Mr. McCain is heavily disliked by the Republican base. But who was Mr. McCain's 2000 campaign co-chairman? That's right, the senator from Law & Order.
Worse, by an order of magnitude, is the fact that Mr. Thompson was not only a friend to Mr. McCain, he was a true-believer in the legislative malfeasance that may ultimately have signed Mr. McCain's fate: McCain-Feingold. Mr. Thompson co-sponsored the most egregious assault on the First Amendment since the Alien and Sedition Acts.
My favorite item mentioned in the Slate article, however, is this:
He's a consistent federalist: Believing in states' rights is a central tenet of conservative thinking, but so is opposition to homosexuality and support for sweeping tort reform. Thompson opposes gay marriage but believes states should be allowed to sanction civil unions, as the governor of the early-primary state New Hampshire has just said he'll do. While in the Senate, Thompson, a former trial lawyer, also resisted one of the tenets of the Contract With America that called for limitations on malpractice awards—an issue he thinks should be left to the states.
It's my favorite because I really don't know if it's right or wrong. The kind of Republican Party I'd like to see would treat a serious commitment to federalism as a serious virtue. But a more federalist Republican Party would also have to mean a Republican Party less committed to thwarting gay marriage and civil unions and more comfortable with allowing economic and social liberalism generally, in states that choose to go in that direction.
So far, I think, Mr. Thompson has the clearest track record of any of the Republican candidates (OK, he's not a candidate yet) on federalism. But I'd note that both Rudy Giuliani and Mr. McCain have made serious noises about federalism as well. The only candidates who's had little to say on federalism on the Republican side, so far, has been Maladroit Mitt.
For good reason.
spam...
Oh brother.
I don’t think Fred’s stand on federalism is a bad thing...stuff like gay “marriage” and abortion should be pushed back down to the states IMO. Then the battles can be fought in the state legislatures, where they should be. And if abortion and gay “marriage” is legalized by the LEGISLATURES (not by judicial fiat) in those states? Well, the people’s representatives have spoken, and they’ll have to answer for it, one way or the other.
His friendship with McQueeg...meh. The Senate is a very clubby place. His sponsorship of the unconstitutional abomination that is CFR is a bad thing, but I’d be interested to hear his current opinion on it, and if he realizes he screwed up.
}:-)4
You can smell the fear of Fred. It is so thick, you could cut it with a knife.
Anyone hear want to dialog?
This is important.
The guns are out for Fred apparently.
Sure, I can . What’s on your mind?
Discounting people with guilt by association, puh_leeez. The lame of lame.
I agree. Fred Thompson has some serious flaws which can’t be explained away, as hard as the Fred Speds may try. I’ve seen Thompson supporters defend Bill Clinton while trying to justify his not guilty vote on the perjury charge, I’ve seen them dismiss his attack on our First Amendment rights because Thompson has “changed his mind”.
Of course, now the Fred Speds will attack me for telling the truth. I’ll be accused of being part of another campaign, etc etc. No matter how hysterical they get, it won’t change the fact that they have abandoned conservative principles in the name of supporting a candidate who hasn’t even entered the race yet.
Yeah, let’s chat. Let’s have a dialog.
I smell viking kitties in your future.
I’d say this is way too much ‘inside baseball’ and irrelevant to the coming primary season.
The points in the post.
Now this is an interesting point of view. Tell me more.
On national defense and fiscal matters, he's also more likely to take a consrvative approach than our current prez or any of the other candidates.
If he jumps in, it's over for Rudy McRomney.
No. No. I understand that the new tone on FR is calling for dialog.
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.