Posted on 06/23/2007 7:19:15 AM PDT by etradervic
After John East, a stalwart conservative from North Carolina, entered the U.S. Senate in 1981, wags began referring to Jesse Helms as "the liberal senator from the Tar Heel state." We are reminded of this tale as Republican activists rush to encourage, if not yet fully embrace, the presidential candidacy of Fred Thompson, the former senator from Tennessee. The Republican base is evidently unimpressed or uninspired (or both) by the conservative credentials of the top three Republicans (John McCain, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani) seeking the 2008 presidential nomination. Mr. Thompson's most-oft-cited conservative credential is his 86.1 percent lifetime (1995-2002) Senate vote rating compiled by the American Conservative Union (ACU), the organization that many rightly consider a leading arbiter of conservatism. In the same relative sense that Mr. Helms could be considered North Carolina's "liberal senator," Mr. Thompson's ACU rating would qualify him to be "the liberal senator from Tennessee" during his eight-year stint. Bill Frist, who defeated Democratic incumbent Jim Sasser, was elected to the Senate from Tennessee the same year (1994) as Mr. Thompson, who won the seat vacated in 1993 by then-Vice President Gore. During the eight years they represented Tennessee together, Mr. Frist compiled an ACU rating of 89.3 percent, making Mr. Thompson "the liberal senator from the Volunteer state."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Each candidate must get out there and raise money from like minded folks. Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul have been around a while, if they can't get their message out, that's no one's fault but their own. But maybe folks HAVE looked at them, and decided that they cannot win a general election when more than just solid conservative voters will be doing the choosing. Nothing wrong with practical thinking; it's better than setting the GOP up for a General Election loss.
And for good reason. I don't have a candidate yet!
>>>>>Please be fair.
I'm always fair.
Fact is, Romney hasn't made any issue his signature issue and just answering questions doesn't cut it for this conservative. In that regard and IMO, Romney is skirting ALL the issues. Just answering questions doesn't make a candidate a stand out.
When Reagan ran for POTUS, his campaign agenda centered around a strong defense, tax reform, limited government and honest respect for right to life issues.
When I think of Mitt Romney and his quest for the Presidency, there is not one specific issue that I associate with him. NONE!
Yep! Whichever man wins the primary. Rudy’s not my first choice, but if it’s between him & a Dem, I’ll vote for him.
crunk wrote: “..but aren’t we supposed to be smarter than ‘most people’...”
Spoken like a true elitist liberal snob!
Oh yeh! In a perfect world, I would gladly vote for Duncan Hunter. He is without doubt the most conservative candidate running. I wish him well and might vote for him in the primary, but we just can’t give the White House up to Clinton Chronicles II! Personally I am one of the few republicans standing behing Bush for the most part. Yes, I disagree with some aspects of his policies, But John Kerry, Never! Al “nutcase” Gore? Never! Bush, at least, for better or worse, stands by his convictions, unlike his predecessor!
Duncan Hunter is great. I am not sure why people who don't think Romney is conservative enough would support Fred instead of Duncan. To me, both Fred and Mitt are more conservative than Fred (based on their actual records, not just words).
The only thing I can say is that it DOES come down to electability. It is an "it" factor that one cannot even articulate or quantify. Hunter does not have "it." If he did, I'd be his biggest backer. He does not have what it takes (and what we need) to attract women, independents and Reagan Democrats to our side. It it not his record. It is more his demeanor and delivery. That's sad, I know. But, it's reality.
To me, Hunter and Romney agree on a lot (no amnesty, no funding for abortions, supportive of the war on terror) and Romney provides the best package available to us to advance our cause.
Not since President Reagan has America had what it has in Romney ---- an articulate, charismatic, energetic, conservative leader capable of effectively communicating a positive and hopeful message of conservatism and persuading others to join the conservative cause.
And his record as governor was conservative as is his current platform.
__________________________
Hey, I could be wrong and Hunter could miraculously skyrocket to the top. If he does, I hope he picks Mitt for VP!
FreeReign wrote: “Fred said that you can’t deport 12 million...”
No, he didn’t say THAT, either. what he said was, deporting 12 million is “not going to happen.”
We can deport as many as we want to, if we’re willing to spend the money and take the time. But the sheer LOGISTICS of deporting 12 to 20 million are mind-boggling. For example, if the number is “only” 12 million, and you used 60-passenger Greyhound buses, that would be 200,000 bus loads. If you used 300-passenger airliners, that would be 40,000 plane loads. It would take a number of years and cost a lot of money.
Fred said that it would be better to take away the incentives that draw and keep illegals here, and many of them would leave on their own. That would cosiderably reduce the number that needed to be deported, along with the cost of doing it and the time required.
I see from your tag line that you have already divined the future. This race has far from even begun as of yet, I suggest we not make such conclusions from merely watching the first ten minutes of the show.
Well, apparently you haven't been listening. Romney's platform sounds Reaganesque.
I guess you haven't heard about the three-legged stool which Mitt discussed at the last debate or maybe you haven't seen any of his commercials or visited his website.
Mitt is the only one who has articulated a campaign theme (the three-pronged approach to strength) and he has posted a very specific agenda on his website which addresses Iran, border security, lower taxes, smaller government etc. His commercials indicate he is focused on cutting spending, shrinking government and strengthening the military.
_________________________
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Romney's three-legged 'stool'
Romney told CNN Wednesday a successful GOP candidate must be strong on the military, strong on the economy and strong on family.
COLUMBIA, South Carolina (CNN) -- The "stool" is a staple of Mitt Romney's campaign pitch. To be successful, he argues, Republicans need a strong message on the military, the economy, and families.
So it was no surprise when the former Massachusetts governor raised the "stool" theme Wednesday in a breakfast with state GOP chairmen, and then later in a brief interview with CNN.
But this time the way he delivered the lines seemed a bit more pointed, leaving some in his audience convinced it was directed at Rudy Giuliani's argument that he is the party's best hope in the general election.
In the conversation with CNN, Romney said:
"Republicans win when they have a stool, if you will, with three legs. Strong military, strong economy and strong family. And it's just not going to be possible to have a nominee who can't speak on all three topics with passion and with a record that supports their capacity to generate a strong family, a strong military and a strong economy."
The latter half could be interpreted as a suggestion the twice-divorced Giuliani might not be as strong a candidate as a man married for 38 years.
Heard the same BS in 1986. Action speaks louder than empty rhetoric.
Congress determined the best way to control immigration was to take away the incentive to enter the United States by preventing illegal immigrants from working or receiving government benefits. The Immigration Reform and Control Act provides sanctions for knowingly hiring an employee who is not legally authorized to work. It requires employers and states to check work authorization documents for every new employee or benefit applicant, including U.S. citizens, and to complete a related form.
http://www.answers.com/topic/immigration-reform-and-control-act-of-1986
BUILD DUNCAN HUNTER'S FENCE and ENFORCE CURRENT LAW (deportation).
http://www.answers.com/topic/immigration-reform-and-control-act-of-1986
RasterMaster wrote: “Fred doesn’t support a fence, doesn’t support employer sanctions, but DOES support amnesty for those who have broken the law.”
Those were Ryan Sager’s opinions based on old information.
“He has stated in interviews that he wants the triple-layer fencing proposed last year by the GOP in Congress, but he also wants a ‘virtual’ fence — electronic surveillance, motion sensors, etc. He wants the Border Patrol’s ranks expanded, and he wants someone in charge of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) that will do their job as it is outlined by the law. (Right now, the current Border Patrol Chief, Daniel Aguilera, was handed a vote of ‘no confidence’ by his Border Patrol agents; they believe he is an ‘amnesty-first’ person.) Again, Senator Thompson realizes that national security should come first, and that includes keeping a vigilant watch on our borders.”
- Thomas Clark and Marcie Packard, Common Conservative, May 16, 2007
http://www.commonconservative.com/clark-packard/clark-packard051607.shtml
“I think most people feel disillusioned after 1986 when we had this deal offered to them before, and now we’re insisting that, you know, we solve the security problem first, and then we’ll talk about what to do with regard to other things — certainly no amnesty or nothing blanket like that...”
“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.”
Former Sen. Fred Thompson on ‘FOX News Sunday’
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258222,00.html
“I equate Matalin with Bush the Elder’s failed moderate policies”
She and Carville have turned their odd-couple marriage into a money making business for sure. Tim Russert seems to like their little duet as he has them on Meet the Press regularily. However, I wonder how any Republican candidate could trust the judgement of someone who sleeps with the likes of James Carville.
They get really testy when they realize they haven’t got a snowball’s chance... HunCredo McJuliRomney
From your keyboard to Gods’ eyes.
Actually that statement was based on Fred’s interview with Sean Hannity, just two weeks ago.
You wouldn’t know a fact if it bit you on the butt:
“’Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts,’ Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1 with legislators, sportsmen’s groups and gun safety advocates. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.’”
“Like the federal assault weapons ban, the state ban, put in place in 1998, was scheduled to expire in September. The new law ensures these deadly weapons, including AK-47s, UZIs and Mac-10 rifles, are permanently prohibited in Massachusetts no matter what happens on the federal level.”
http://www.iberkshires.com/story.php?story_id=14812
Romney is pro-second-amendment (he says), but also pro-”assault weapons”-ban. Like John Kerry, he’s on both sides of nearly every issue.
“Mitt Romney supports the strict enforcement of gun laws. He is a supporter of the federal assault weapons ban. Mitt also believes in the rights of those who hunt to responsibly own and use firearms.”
—Romney campaign statement
Deseret News, Sept. 1, 2002
This statement shows that Romney supports the assault weapons ban. But even more troubling is that he doesn’t understand the Second Amendment. It’s not about hunting. It’s about the people’s right to protect themselves from their own government.
When it comes to the 2nd Amendment as guaranteeing a right to self-defense, Fred gets it.
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.