Posted on 05/24/2007 12:02:11 AM PDT by familyop
Mitt Romney is rightly being hit for his flip-flop on immigration. However, Fred Thompson's "tough" stance isn't exactly enough to make him the restrictionists' hero, either.
As recently as 2006, Mr. Thompson clearly stated that some sort of legalization — or "amnesty" — would be necessary. He seems to be for a virtual border fence (like President Bush) instead of a brick-and-mortar one. And he doesn't want tough sanctions for employers.
This all puts Mr. Thompson roughly in line with Rudy Giuliani.
On a path to citizenship: "[B]ecause we allowed ourselves to wait until we woke up one day and found 12 million illegals here, there's no easy solution. And I think that you have to realize that you're either going to drive 12 million people underground permanently, which is not a good solution. You're going to get them all together and get them out of the country, which is not going to happen. Or you're going to have to, in some way, work out a deal where they can have some aspirations of citizenship, but not make it so easy that it's unfair to the people waiting in line and abiding by the law." (Fox News' "Hannity & Colmes," 4/3/06)
On the problems with cracking down on employers: "We haven't enforced the law, in terms of employers. … For 20 years, we've not enforced the law, and that's a part of the problem. You can't enforce it all on the backs of the employers. People falsify information that they give employers and all that. That's not a solution to the problem." (Fox News' "Hannity & Colmes," 4/3/06)
On his skepticism of a brick-and-mortar border fence: FOX's ALAN COLMES: "You don't put up a fence, either, do you? Is that bad neighbor policy, put a fence up?" THOMPSON: "If it would work. I mean, I don't know – that's a technical problem. In this day and age, I would not think you would have to use bricks and mortar to get that job done. But we ought to do everything that we can to get it done to the extent that we can and then, as I say, I think people would be willing to take a look at the rest of the problem, what we do with the problem that we created." (Fox News' "Hannity & Colmes," 4/3/06)
On enforcement first: "We woke up one day after years of neglect and apparently discovered that we have somewhere between 12 million and 20 million illegal aliens in this country. So it became an impossible situation to deal with. I mean, there's really no good solution. So what do you do? You have to start over. Well, I'm concerned about the next 12 million or 20 million. So that's why enforcement, and enforcement at the border, has to be primary." (Fox's "Fox News Sunday," 3/11/07)
On not rounding up illegal immigrants: "You know, if you have the right kind of policies, and you're not encouraging people to come here and encouraging them to stay once they're here, they'll go back, many of them, of their own volition, instead of having to, you know, load up moving vans and rounding people up. That's not going to happen." (Fox's "Fox News Sunday," 3/11/07)
Anybody who is OK with Mitt 'evolving' on the issue of abortion should have no problem with Fred 'evolving' on the position of what can and should be done with the illegals.
Smearing conservatives won’t work for long on Free Republic.
He can’t - notice he conveniently disappeared.
Yeah, but Graham started flipping his wig about a year ago...
That is true.
Most (not all) of the reason Fred’s rating is lower is his Federalist stance - he often voted against a supposedly conservative bill if said conservative bill was an issue he felt should be left to the states.
There's nothing wrong with that comment. Sounds to me he's saying we need to actually enforce existing laws and beef up security and no wall should be needed. And his other comments remain consistent in that regard - enforcement is necessary.
Graham is a little wacky, true. The rating was updated May 23, however.
Whatever- his appearance means nothing to me. His voting record does- particularly CFR.
His voting record is one of supporting fiscal conservatism, LEGAL immigration, anti-corruption, and Federalism.
His reasoning for supporting CFR was based on being anti-corruption - and while I disagree with the VOTE, I agree with his reasoning.
Also - he has said it’s not working well and it might be a good idea to scrap it. Not a perfect solution, but admitting it was wrong it a BIG step for any politician, is it not? McCain has done no such thing.
Cool.
I’m certainly not going to pass judgment on him based on a few quotes. I do have some concerns, however, and now is the time to address them. He has been very forthcoming so far.
I do like Thompson as a candidate. Hunter is absolutely without a doubt awesome.
He has, and that's a fair way to look at it.
If we didn't know it before, we've got plenty of examples in this campaign.
So I'd wait until Fred says his last word.
It will be interesting to see how his experiences in New York and Hollywood will affect his stand.
Will they make him more or less pro-immigration than he was before or than other Tennesseans in Congress are?
That’s it. I will not bother with you any more. That is a perfectly legitimate vote by a man who is STERLING on the second amendment. If a parent wants a kid to have a gun, they can buy it themselves. Minors shouldn’t be buying guns. You are ridiculous.
*******
*
From the enactment of the Bill of Rights in 1791 until the 20th Century, no one seriously argued that the Second Amendment dealt with anything but an individual right — along with all other nine original amendments. Kates writes that not one court or commentator denied it was a right of individual gun owners until the last century. Judges and commentators in the 18th and 19th century routinely described the Second Amendment as a right of individuals. And they expressly compared it to the other rights such as speech, religion, and jury trial.
The Times has simply replayed theories invented by the 20th century gun control movement. Their painting of the individual right interpretation as a minority view is equally fanciful.
Kates writes that, “Over 120 law review articles have addressed the Second Amendment since 1980. The overwhelming majority affirm that it guarantees a right of individual gun owners. That is why the individual right view is called the ‘standard model’ view by supporters and opponents alike. With virtually no exceptions, the few articles to the contrary have been written by gun control advocates, mostly by people in the pay of the anti-gun lobby.”
Kates goes further, writing that “a very substantial proportion” of the articles supporting individual gun rights are by scholars who would have been happy to find evidence that guns could be banned. When guns were outlawed in D.C., crime and murder rates skyrocketed. Still, the sentiment exists and must be countered with facts. All of this highlights why it is so important to appoint judges who understand that their job is to interpret the law, as enacted by will of the people, rather than make it up as they go along.
- Fred Thompson, The Fred Thompson Report, May 10, 2007
http://abcradio.com/article.asp?id=405250&SPID=15663
*
“U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment, announced he will not seek re-election this year. His support of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms will certainly be missed.”
- NRA-ILA Fax Alert Vol. 9, No. 10, 3/8/2002
http://nrawinningteam.com/0203/thompson.html
*
Fred Thompson on Gun Control:
Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted NO on more penalties for gun violations. (May 1999)
Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm
*
Fred Thompson on SenateMatch:
Strongly Favors topic 10: Absolute right to gun ownership
(10 points on Social scale)
YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks: Strongly Favors topic 10
YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows: Favors topic 10
NO on background checks at gun shows: Strongly Favors topic 10
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson_SenateMatch.htm
*
“Fred... voted for numerous measures in support of Second Amendment rights. (Charlton Heston campaigned for him in ‘94.)”
- Mark Alexander, HaveGunWillVote.com
http://www.havegunwillvote.com/index.php?sec=news&id=420
*
The GOP Candidates on the Second Amendment
“The NY Sun reviews the position of the serious GOP presidential candidates on the most battered of all constitutionally-enshrined God given rights, that of self defense from crime and tyranny...
By comparison [to Romeny, guiliani and McCain], Mr. [Fred] Thompson’s relationship with gun-rights groups is sterling. A 2000 report from a campaign-finance watchdog group, Common Cause, found that the NRA, Gun Owners of America, and the Georgia Gun Owners PAC donated $188,954 to Mr. Thompson between 1993 and 1999; the groups donated more only to Dr. Frist.”
http://www.alphapatriot.com/home/archives/2007/04/05/the_gop_candidates_on_the_second_amendment.php
*
Fred Thompson, the actor and former U.S. senator, wins plaudits from the National Rifle Association and others who defend firearms access. He said in a Fox News interview last month, “Well, I’m against gun control generally.”
By contrast Mitt Romney as Massachusetts governor praised his state’s tough gun laws, though he’s since joined the NRA. Sen. John McCain has had scrapes with the NRA, though he’s generally been protective of gun ownership. Giuliani, as New York City mayor, supported strong government restrictions on all firearms
Dan Janison, Newsday, April 9, 2007
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/ny-lispin095164260apr09,0,4516399.story
*
Former Sen. Fred Thompson on ‘FOX News Sunday’
WALLACE: Gun control.
THOMPSON: Well, I’m against gun control generally. You know, you check my record. You’ll find I’m pretty consistent on that issue.
WALLACE: So this federal court — appeals court ruling this last week, I guess Friday, in the case of D.C. — you’d be perfectly happy to have people have handguns in their homes?
THOMPSON: Yes. Absolutely. The court basically said the Constitution means what it says, and I agree with that.
- Chris Wallace, Fox News Sunday,March 11, 2007
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258222,00.html
*
The Fred Thompson Annual Charity Shoot
Billed as the “Fred Thompson Celebrity Skeet Shoot,” the title captured both the essence and the diversity of the event. What was originally a political event dates back to when Fred Thompson was running for the US Senate. With the help of Donna Hilley of Sony/ATV Music, he put together a celebrity event to help him raise money and generate some positive PR. It did both and he was elected.
The senator wanted to continue the event after his election, but wanted to do so for a charity. Initially it was pointed towards diabetes in general. Eventually, Thompson handed the event over to the Sugarbugs, a non-profit, support-group organization for children suffering from diabetes. In 2000, the event raised $170,000 for the kids.
Thompson recruited some of his friends and associates for the events- political buddies, movie and television buddies, and country music buddies. Into this mix were added a few doses of sponsors from various industries and a generous helping of “un-celebrities” interested in contributing to a worthy cause. There were celebrities from country music duo Brooks and Dunn to actress Leslie Easterbrook. Sponsors ranged from firearms manufacturers Ruger, Remington and Beretta to the Tennessee Highway Patrol, BellSouth and FedEx.
- Marty Liggins, GunWeek.com, Spring, 2000
http://www.gunweek.com/2000/feature0810.html
* Under abortion: He checked the box for: "Abortions should be legal in all circumstances as long as the procedure is completed within the first trimester of the pregnancy." He did, however, support a number of restrictions on abortion: requiring parental notification, allowing states to impose waiting periods, and eliminating all federal funding of abortion. Lastly, he said Congress should leave legislation on abortion to the states.
Thompson's 1994 Issue Positions
Posted by Ryan Sager
Mon, 7 May 2007 at 2:16 PM
And on abortion, his comments echoed those he gave to THE WEEKLY STANDARD last week, when I asked about press reports from his first Senate campaign in 1994 that identified him as pro-choice. Thompson said: "I have read these accounts and tried to think back 13 years ago as to what may have given rise to them. Although I don't remember it, I must have said something to someone as I was getting my campaign started that led to a story. Apparently, another story was based upon that story, and then another was based upon that, concluding I was pro-choice."(is he, or isn't he??!!) He added: "I was interviewed and rated pro-life by the National Right to Life folks in 1994, and I had a 100 percent voting record on abortion issues while in the Senate."
Right, Said Fred Thompson didn't announce, but he said all the right things.
by Stephen F. Hayes
04/19/2007 12:00:00 AM
Is he pro-choice or pro-life? Does Mr Thompson know how to give an YES or NO answer, without political speakese?
If you want to search further, check into his stance during the process of the attempts to impeach Clinton. You will find a compromiser.
Not the kind of strength, backbone, decisiveness needed to run a country, IMHO.
No, by CFR I mean Campaign Finance Reform.
see my previous post, per thompson. one needs to listen with a critical ear, and translate the political speakese...use discernment regarding words and actions. ("by their fruit you will know them")
so far hunter looks good. still watching and listening.
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.