Posted on 06/05/2007 8:03:39 AM PDT by kellynla
Your tagline ought to be on a t-shirt.
God bless him. I hope he gets nominated.
Thaks for the information. I like Hunter, but I don’t think he has the money or visibility that Thompson has, although they are ideologically very close.
I would vote for Thompson or Hunter, if I was forced to - even Romney - but that is as desparate as I am willing to go.
Fred Thompson is still by far the best candidate out there.
“I’m happy he condemned the bill in the Senate,” Vinson told Cybercast News Service. “But I’m bothered he doesn’t seem to think we should encourage them to go back.”
Surprisingly, middle American citizens understand that women attending Hollywood events long before their husbands became possible Presidential candidates are allowed to dress in a stylish, sexy style. Your point is assumes that many women are prudes.
Should we question the bias of the writer by using such a loaded, emotional term?
I agree with you that he is the best candidate out there. His stands on the WOT, illegal immigration, pro-life, 2cnd amendment seem to be pretty satisfactory. Plus he appears to be unflappable, steady, and his face is well known. If he had any executive experience it would help improve his chances.
In a field where the Dem candidate is most definitely going to be a senator, this becomes much less of a concern. Fred Thompson clearly wins the battle of the senators hands down. He has more experience and a far more principled record than any of is opponents on either side of the aisle.
Executive experience has long been touted as a prerequisite for the presidency. But what we seem to keep ending up with are administrators that are great executives, but aren't much good at being leaders. What we need in these troubling times is an ideological leader. Someone that can not only handle the administrative duties of being president, but also can lead the conservative movement. This kind of leadership is what we are sorely lacking and what the conservative base is longing for. Leading the conservative movement doesn't mean caving in to liberal policy or allowing liberals to set the agenda. It is also about more than partisan arguing. It's about convincing people WHY CONSERVATIVES ARE RIGHT!
Executives are a dime a dozen. We could raid any one of the Fortune 500 and grab a fantastic executive. Does that make them fit to be the leader of the free world? Think about that for a second: THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD. That takes a lot more than running a company, the Olympic games, or a liberal city or state. It takes a man that can inspire people. It takes a man that is grounded in his beliefs. It takes a man with great command of the issues that face us both here and abroad. It takes a man that doesn't sway with the wind. It takes a man that can articulate the things that we believe in to the people of this country and our allies worldwide.
What we need is an ideological leader. Anything less and all you have is a babysitter of the free world.
I'm working on it
Was it having to do with seasonal Mexican workers who come in officially for a crop harvest and then go home for the rest of the year? That would be a sane way to handle it.--except the ag employer needs to be paying taxes and helping out with medical costs.
“He’s a nice enough guy, but the idea he is the second coming of Reagan is a bit exaggerated,” David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, told Cybercast News Service.
With all due respect to the late great President Reagan (who holds a holds a special place in my heart as both President and Commander and Chief), Sen Thompson appears to me to be “practically” more conservative than President Reagan ever was. Beloved President Reagan talked socially conservative, but look at who he placed on the SCOTUS like Sanda O. I don’t think Thompson would do that (I have been fooled before). President Reagan really never used executive power to do things to dampen social/moral decline. I hope (I could be fooled) that the plain spoken TN senator won’t be so afraid to use his office.
If Thompson a “second coming” of President Reagan. No, I think he may be much better. (and like I said, I hold President Reagan in high regard).
I also agree that we need more of an ideologue who can articulate why the Conservative position is the best one. Still, I do not totally discount the value of executive experience-some corporate execs have also been good leaders, with philosophy underpinning their methodologies.
Rather than simply discounting the value of this credential, why not tell me other things Fred has done that show he has actually demonstrated the same skills? After all, corporate executive experience and being a governor are not the only way to earn such credentials.
Then when I try to convince others (such as Dems not happy with Hillary) I can both discount the opposition and build up Fred’s credentials at the same time. I convinced several dyed in the wool dems to vote for Bush. Lately they are not so sure about that vote. Then I remind them of 9/11 and the other option, Sorelooser Man or Kerry the disgraceful peacenik, and they agree it was the better choice.
Me too, and pro-life as well, and same opinion. Bush himself talked a great game on abortion, but has only singed the partial birth bill (which any GOP Prez would have done), but he has not proposed to cut a single penny from the Federal subsidies of Planned Parenthood, nor has Bush proposed any monies for 3D ultrasounds (to which "Raymond's" Patricia Heaton and James Dobson have personally given millions), or prosed a waiting period for abortions. So talk is cheap, and I am focusing more on Fred's votes, which have been rock solid pro-life.
Most of the “problems” they list for him are either unimportant (he slept around while single) easily explained (abortion is a states rights issue) or misleading (the immigration bill dealt with a change to an existing guest worker program nothing more).
The one issue that I do not like is the campaign finance reform bill.
Overall I have to give him a thumbs up.
“John Vinson, president of American Immigration Control, said no candidate is perfect but believes there are reasons to oppose Thompson.
“I’m happy he condemned the bill in the Senate,” Vinson told Cybercast News Service. “But I’m bothered he doesn’t seem to think we should encourage them to go back.”
I generally avoid labels, since there doesn't seem to be a universally accepted definition of what "conservative" means. That said, I would argue that Thompson's staunch leadership on federalism and returning rightful power to the states is an extremely conservative stance, as it strives to "conserve" the Constitution as the Founders meant it to be.
No, Thompson isn't perfect, nor is anyone. But honestly, I never thought in my lifetime that I'd see a presidential candidate with such a strong and consistent record of leadership on federalism. Combined with his national security experience and his ability to communicate, Thompson is in my view the best candidate we've had for many years.
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.