Don't forget to vote in the new FR poll!!
Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
Posted on 11/19/2007 9:19:11 AM PST by Fred
The New Fire in Fred’s Belly
A revitalized Thompson has an honest, clear, straightforward message of economic freedom and problem solving.
An energetic and forceful Fred Thompson sat down with me last week on Kudlow and Company to talk politics and the economy. The former Tennessee senator was in good form — more animated than I’ve seen him, and definitely a different person than the one I interviewed six months ago.
I asked him about Dick Armey, the former Republican House majority leader. Armey recently predicted that Hillary Clinton will be the next president, reasoning that the GOP has departed from the first principles of limited government and lower taxes. Armey said budget overspending and the proliferating corruption of earmarks are what led to the landslide defeat of Republicans a year ago. To date, Dick Armey is unimpressed with the circa 2007 GOP message.
And Thompson agreed. He said, “If we don’t tend to business we are going to be in big trouble. Pendulum’s swinging against us. We are down in the polls. Independents are leaning the other way [where they] used to lean with us. So we’ve got to . . . adhere to the principles that made us a great party and a great nation.”
That was a strong dose of honesty and self-examination. Good for Fred Thompson.
Speaking of limited government and budget overspending, I asked if a President Thompson would veto the $300 billion earmark-pocked pork-barrel farm bill now before Congress. He called this legislation “disgraceful,” noted that it wouldn’t even help small family farms, and that it would block the expansion of world free trade.
When I asked him about Warren Buffett, the famous investor billionaire, Thompson turned up the heat. In testimony before the Senate last week, Buffett advocated a whole series of tax hikes, such as an increase in the death tax, higher capital gains and dividend taxes, and more taxes on private partnerships, hedge funds, and private-equity buyout firms. Thompson labeled this policy dead wrong. He said Buffett is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Democratic party. He argued that the wealth of the government is the not the same thing as the wealth of nations, and that history proves lower tax rates promote economic growth.
And he said Hillary Clinton and the other Democratic candidates are blind to all this. He noted that the top 5 percent of income earners now pay 60 percent of all tax collections; that the tax code is progressive enough; that there’s plenty of economic mobility in the country; that for those who have fallen behind, the problem is poor education, not tax rates; and that America is the freest, most prosperous, most powerful nation in the history of the world.
We talked about his controversial Social Security reform plan that would slow down future benefits by indexing them to inflation rather than wages, while providing for add-on private savings accounts with a government match, much like the system for 401(k)s.
Lower benefits? Isn’t that the proverbial third-rail of politics? Not according to Mr. Thompson. He said big problems ought to be tackled: “If you can’t do the right thing, say what you believe and what everybody really basically knows, why do it? Why bother? Life is too short for the aggravation.”
Thompson wants to tell the truth about Social Security and force everyone else in the game to respond. This issue is a real character-building definer for Fred Thompson. No one else on the campaign trail, in either party, is willing to discuss Social Security in such frank terms.
But that’s the revitalized Fred Thompson. The more I challenged him, the more animated he became. He simply refused to stand down.
Some people say Thompson doesn’t have the fire in his belly to go the distance. I don’t think that’s true. And I’m not picking or endorsing any candidates here. But Thompson has an honest, clear, straightforward message of economic freedom and problem solving.
Then I brought up the CNBC/Wall Street Journal debate of a few weeks ago, when Thompson slammed Rudy Giuliani. I asked if he intended to continue to pound Giuliani on the campaign trail. He said, “I haven’t pounded all day.” I asked, What about yesterday? He said, “Well, we’re pointing out some policy differences. [Giuliani] believes in federal funding for abortion. He went to court to stop our bill outlawing sanctuary cities. He’s never met a gun-control bill he didn’t like.”
A sharp-edged Fred Thompson.
Can he win? His campaign strategists told me they are pouring tons of money into Iowa advertising. They see a strong opportunity for a Thompson surge in the state, undermining Romney and inflicting damage on Giuliani. Walking off the set, Thompson told me this election will be about peace and prosperity. And he intends to fight hard.
— Larry Kudlow, NRO’s Economics Editor, is host of CNBC’s Kudlow & Company and author of the daily web blog, Kudlow’s Money Politic$.
Couldn’t have said it better myself! I would love to see a Thompson/Hunter ticket.
My primary vote will be going to Duncan Hunter, but I will support WHOMEVER is the party’s nominee in November. I would love to send a message by voting for a third-party candidate, or staying home, but I’m not sure my personal constitution could make it through another lesson like the one we learned in 2006!
No prob-lee-mo!
But I saw this interview; Fred did look better than usual.
I’ve always thought he had “fire in the belly” although I don’t like that expression. He has a better reason for running than anyone else. It is nice to see someone else say it though. Encouragement is always helpful.
Thanks for posting this.
Bump
GO FRED GO!!! For the sake of our country, GO FRED GO!!
Don't forget to vote in the new FR poll!!
Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
You’re reflecting our culture of instant gratification and entertainment politics. God forbid, we should have maturity and statesmanship and focus among the candidates for President. That’s exactly what Fred brings that the rest do not. The self-control and character he is showing will carry him along very well in his plan (which of course, he has) to lead him to victory next fall. He will be the one to go up against Hillary, and the contrast, even for Direhard Dems, will be startling. That’s my prediction.
It’s leadership we need — at every area of the POTUS — and it’s true leadership that we will get from Fred for the long haul (not Guliani, who writes a BOOK about “Leadership”).
I like Duncan a lot also — and i hope Fred chooses him as his running mate. He could redefine the whole office of VP by putting someone of substance and competence in there.
Actually the word goes back at least 500 years before the Romans destroyed the Temple...Herodotus refers to Palestinians and Syria Palaestina when describing the Persian Empire. I don’t know if the term was ever in official use before Vespasian, but it derives from the name of the Philistines so must have been coined before they were utterly forgotten. It’s not clear how large an area Herodotus means by the term, perhaps just the area the Philistines had inhabited.
You win a CEE-GARRR! I do not see any reason a VP has to be a wallflower. We are paying his salary, let's put him to work!
Dick Cheney does not sit around autographing flags, why would Duncan?
This is a huge deal for me. Big bump for Thompson.
You’re right about Cheney — HOWEVER,the media still will NOT give him the respect he has deserved from Day One. If there was a Dem VP worthy of the same level of respect, it would be different. Maybe I’m dreaming to think the press will ever change idealogically....but a girl can dream, yes?
I sent more money today...I will give the entire amount...unfortunately in increments.
Happy to hear about the ‘fire in the belly.’
Now perhaps he would be kind enough to set fire to the NeoConNaysayers over at NRO who (with one exception I know of) are writing him off for dead.
Oh, sure, there are earlier references, but the Phillistines were sea-farers and coast-dwellers (and have no relation to the arabs who call themselves Palestinians, but that is another issue entirely).
Long story short, though, using the name for the entire territory came about because the Romans, in order to basically put us Jews in our place, used the name of our old enemy as the name of the land.
And, since the Romans made the maps, the name has stuck.
Great interview! I’m gonna bookmark the site to return often.
Perhaps but will the voters respond in just 45 days and on Feb. 5??? That is the real question.
This is FRed. :)
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.