Ann Coulter said in an interview that Fred Thompson is much like the Democrats’ Obama in one way: we only have what he has said to go on. He has no history in defense and little as a Senator.
Undecided, but leaning toward Thompson. I am concerned about his thin record, but with Reagan we only had his speeches and his tenure as California governor. Rhetorical skills are essential for a conservative president to be successful. Given the “squishy middle”, conservative policy has to be sold. Even when he is right, GWB is rhetorically challenged. He has been diminished as President because of it. Whatever his flaws, Fred is a communicator. Also, he is better by far than any possible Democrat candidate.
Hunter’s history isn’t as good as it has been touted, either. It’s not “BAD” in any way, but he’s not the stellar perfect Congresscritter he is portrayed to be.
familyop wrote: “...Fred Thompson... has no history in defense and little as a Senator.”
It’s one thing to post legitimate criticisms of Fred Thompson, and that’s allowed. But lying about Fred’s Senate record is quite another, and should not be allowed on this forum.
Some Duncan Hunter supporters have joined with the Left in attempting to diminish Thompson’s service in the U.S. Senate, and the word they’ve cut and pasted from their talking points memo is “undistinguished.” To me, this seems a suprising tact for the Democrats to take, especially given that collective accomplishments of the Senate careers of their three leading candidates, Senators Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama and John Edwards can’t even come close to measuring up to that of Fred Thompson. But hypocrisy never was something to stop, or even slow down, a liberal hell-bent on attacking an opponent. The media, as expected, and even the supporters of a few of Fred’s GOP opponents, sadly, have joined the Democrats in making these attacks on the nature of Fred Thompson’s Senate career.
Many on the left measure a legislator’s performance by the number of bills he or she introduced. John Kerry, for example, authored a number of measures, but many of them carried no greater weight than to name buildings, roads and airports after some hero or another of the left. When it comes to legislation, conservatives see quality as much more important than quantity.
Fred did plenty as a U.S. Senator. Most of the bills he introduced in that body were aimed at increasing our national security against terrorism, providing tax relief to citizens and small businesses and cutting government red tape. To list just a few of them, we have the Nuclear Proliferation Act, Special Counsel Act, Aviation Security Bill Amendment, FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Bill, Regulatory Right-To-Know Act, Homeland Security Workforce Act, Homeland Security Education Act, Thompson amendment to Treasury-Postal Title (Section 646) of the Consolidated Appropriations Bill, Regulatory Improvement Act (S. 981), Thompson Amendment to the National Homeland Security and Combating Terrorism Act, Thompson Amendment to the National Employee Savings and Trust Equity Act, The Federal Emergency Procurement Flexibility Act, The Federalism Accountability Act, The Government Information Security Reform Act (GISRA), The Thompson Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, and The Truth in Regulation Act.
Fred Thompson is as distingushed by the bad legislation he helped to kill as he is by the good bills he proposed. One particularly nasty measure Fred courageously stood alone against was S507, which would have destroyed our country’s patent system, giving away many American innovations to foreign firms and governments.
According to a recent Cox News Service story, “Thompson chose the unglamorous work of trying to expose waste and reform the federal government. He put heat on federal agencies by holding hearings on mismanagement and by asking them to tote up the improper payments they made each year — about $20 billion altogether. The waste is far from stopped, but agencies are now required by law to disclose their annual overpayments, a practice that is credited for trimming the Department of Health and Human Services’ erroneous payments from $12.1 billion in 2005 to $10.8 billion in 2006.” Sounds like a good start to me.
The Cox article quoted Paul C. Light, a New York University professor and leading expert on government reform, who said of Senator Thompson, “I consider him to be one of the most dedicated overseers of the executive branch of the last 25 years.”
Thompson’s record on spending in the Senate puts the rest of the field to shame. Perhaps his supposed lack of what liberals consider “accomplishments” in the Senate are the result of what a Race 4 2008 article calls “a responsible legislator who erred on the side of ensuring that government didn’t grow, didn’t spend more, didn’t meddle more in people’s lives, and generally left Americans alone. In an age of two big-governnment parties, it isn’t surprising that such a candidate is garnering interest.”
As a result of his consistent commitment to federalist principles and a smaller federal government, Sen. Thompson earned the “Restoring the Balance” Award from the National Conference of State Legislatures, given annually to national policymakers committed to federalism and its impact on issues involving state legislators
Fred Thompson’s Senate committee work puts other presidential contenders to shame:
Member, Foreign Relations Committee, 1995-96
Member, Judiciary Committee, 1995-98
Judiciary Subcommittes
- Chairman, Youth Violence, 1995-96
- Member, Constitution, Federalism and Property Rights, 1997-98
- Member, Technology, Terrorism and Gov’t. Information, 1995-98
Chairman, Governmental Affairs Committee, 1997-2001
Ranking Minority Member, Governmental Affairs Committee, 2001-02
Member, Finance Committee, 1999-2002
Finance subcommittees
- Member, International Trade, 1999-2002
- Member, Taxation and Oversight, 1999-2002
- Member, Social Security and Family Policy, 1999-2002
- Member, Health Care, 1999-2002
When Fred Thompson ran for the Senate he promised the people of Tennessee that he would work to protect our national security, make government work for families, and improve the way Washington does business. He made good on those promises with a record of achievement and leadership.
Democrats and supporters of Fred’s GOP opponents who try to dismiss his significant Senate accomplishments are being, at best, disingenuous.