Rush Limbaugh Says Fred Thompson is the One True Conservative - Audio

Blogs for Fred Thompson ^ | November 29, 2007 | A. Renee Daley

[blogsforthompson.com]

I know the quotation of Rush Limbaugh saying that Fred Thompson was the only true top-tier conservative on the stage at the CNN / YouTube debate has already been posted here at Free Republic. But here is the actual audio of Rush saying that the other day following the debate. There is something about hearing Rush say it himself that really makes it stand out......

[RockinRight]

You know, Mitt supporters complaining about so-called inconsistencies on FRED’S part...boy, if that ain’t the pot calling the kettle a large black piece of cookware, then I don’t know what is.

[bdeaner]

That sure flies in the face of not only Rush’s analysis, but the study of the voters response to Fred, as measured by Luntz’s unique methods. Here is what the actual research revealed. What ARE Lunt'z methods?

[ansel12]

You have never seen Frank Luntz do group reaction testing on TV during political event coverage?

[bdeaner]

I don’t have cable TV. I watch the coverage on-line. Cable News Networks make me want to shoot myself anyway. Giant waste of my time, saying the same crap over and over again, ad nauseaum. I can read the same thing in 2 minutes that it takes them three hours to cover in an endless loop.

In any case, I know what you mean now, with the lines going up and down on the screen. Look, I’m a social scientist. I’m really not sure how valid those methods are. You can watch the same kind of analysis on CNN and you’ll find completely different results. I have seen these clips on the internet, e.g. on you tube. I watched the same clip with the analysis on Fox vs the analysis on CNN, and they were completely opposite reactions. Obviously the samples are biased.

[ansel12]

“Obviously the samples are biased.”

They are supposed to be in this case, for the republican primary debate Luntz’s group was composed of moderate and conservative republicans.

[Hunterite]

http://www.numbersusa.com/index

http://www.betterimmigration.com/

Numbers USA uses America for better immigration reform for their report card.

interests:
America’s Jobless
American Workers
Amnesties
Attrition Through Enforcement
Birthright Citizenship
Black Americans
Environment
Farmland
High-tech worker visas
Illegal Immigration
In-state Tuition
National Sovereignty
Public Opinion
Unions
Urban Sprawl
Smart Business Practices

Their interests aren’t restricted to illegal immigration.

Fred Thompson says is ONLY against illegal immigration, but for the rest of this stuff:

American Workers
Amnesties
Attrition Through Enforcement
Birthright Citizenship
Black Americans
Environment
Farmland
High-tech worker visas
Illegal Immigration
In-state Tuition
National Sovereignty
Public Opinion
Unions
Urban Sprawl
Smart Business Practices

...Thompson gets bad grades. He gets a total of “C”. Which as sad is it is, in relative to other Republican frontrunners is actually a good grade.

Thompson’s report card (C): http://grades.betterimmigration.com/testgrades.php3?District=TN&VIPID=743&retired=1

Hunter’s report card (A): http://grades.betterimmigration.com/testgrades.php3?District=CA&VIPID=133

McCain’s report card (D): http://grades.betterimmigration.com/testgrades.php3?District=AZ&VIPID=33

Tancredo’s report card (A): http://grades.betterimmigration.com/testgrades.php3?District=CO&VIPID=146

IF these groups come out and endorse Thompson then they are cowardly following the “electability theory”.

[ansel12]

Welcome to FR, but you won’t be very popular trying to bring down the only conservative in the running.

And yes, I know that posting this will only result in another long list of reasons why we are all impure and contaminated for putting our support behind Fred Thompson.

[ansel12]

Sorry, I left something out, will you make the list you post to me the longest one possible, just lay it all out there? thanks

[Hunterite]

“impure and contaminated “

*************

Since everyone has their own little definition of “Conservative” how about I appeal to the electability of another free-trade globalist.

Political perception.

Mood of the masses.

Finger on the pulse.

[ansel12]

I didn’t get it.

[LadyNavyVet]

“From Roy Beck, head of NumbersUSA:

“IN A TREND OF INCREASINGLY DETAILED EXCELLENT POLICY PROMISES BY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES — THOMPSON HAS SET A NEW HIGH STANDARD

When Fred Thompson came out with a detailed immigration policy this fall, I knew it was very good but was too busy leading the fight against amnesties in the Senate to give thorough attention.

Reading Thompson’s full proposed immigration policy this afternoon, I am blown away by its depth, its breadth and at how it would so fundamentally change Americans’ future for the better.

As a Senator from Tennessee in the 1990s, Thompson had a mixed record on immigration. I’ve studied that record and believe it reflects the problem that we saw even in some of this year’s Senate heroes who also were mediocre in the 1990s — most of them just weren’t paying much attention to this issue in the 1990s (just like a lot of you have only become active on this during the last couple of years).

NumbersUSA always gives ample credit to politicians who turn from bad or mediocre records and decide to become our champions. But less-than-stellar past records require us to look for signs of sincerity and assurance that they will follow through on their promises.

With Thompson, we will be watching closely for these signs. One strong point for him is that he finished his Senate career with an A-minus performance in 01/02 term after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And since coming out with his official stance, he has not been equivocating when asked about immigration in media appearances or in strong immigration ads.”

Fred gets less than stellar marks from NumbersUSA in some areas because of his votes on LEGAL immigration, and while legal immigration is a problem, illegal immigration is a crisis, and Thompson shines there.

Hunter is a good man and a great conservative. He’s actually my first choice, but I don’t believe he has a chance this time around. For one thing, the media won’t talk about him, and with a truncated primary season where name recognition is going to be more important than usual, not being noticed by the media is fatal.

I’m not one to let perfect be the enemy of good, and we have a very good conservative running who has a shot if we rally around him. I think it’s ultimately self-defeating for those of us who support the conservatives in this race, Thompson, Hunter and Tancredo, to denigrate one in order to elevate another. Movement conservatism has a problem in this country right now, and conservatives indulging in circular firing squads hurt our mutual cause.

[Hunterite]

Ok, we deport 20 million illegals. What happens if a guest worker program lets 20 million legals back in?

[Hunterite]

Examples.

I don’t care about these 2 things which contribute negatively to Thompson’s grade:

1) 1998: Voted against offering jobs to Americans first. Rep. Thompson voted against the Kennedy amendment(A-2417) to S.1723 that would have required U.S. firms applying for H-1B visas to check a box on a form attesting that they had first sought an American worker for the job. The amendment failed
2) 1998: S.1723, Voted to allow American workers to be fired and repalced with a foreign worker. Rep. Thompson voted against the Kennedy Amendment (A-2418) to S.1723 that would have protected American workers from being fired and replaced by a foreign worker (H-1B visa holder). The amendment was defeated 38-60.

....The government has no business micromanaging the proces of hiring and firing.

However I do have a problem with this:

1998: Voted for S.1723, nearly doubling hi-tech visas. Rep. Thompson helped the Senate pass S.1723 in a 78-20 vote. Enacted into law, it increased by nearly 150,000 the number of foreign workers high-tech American companies could hire over the next three years even though U.S. firms were laying off thousands of workers at the time.

http://grades.betterimmigration.com/testgradescategory.php3?District=TN&Category=5&Status=Career&VIPID=743

http://profiles.numbersusa.com/improfile.php3?DistSend=TN&VIPID=743

Thompson was also out of the Senate and conveniently missed voting on HR.4423 (2005) and S.2611 (2006). Seems to me he would be the kind of guy to vote yes on S.2611

It is too convenient for Thompson to be able to squeek by a hair, and say “no amnesty” when every related cheap-labor issue screams “GLOBALIST!”

[seekthetruth]

I have Rush 24/7 and I am going to listen again to the first hour of Rush’s show for last Thursday. I recall him saying “there was one candidate on the stage last night that did not mush into a moderate”. I believe he said that just before what is recorded on the blog recording. I just really liked Rush’s words, implying that Fred DID NOT MUSH INTO A MODERATE! I will listen to Rush’s show again just to make sure I didn’t “hear things” Rush did not say. :)
GO FRED!

[Scourge of God]

.

[redgirlinabluestate]

As far as those votes on legislation are concerned, do you have specifics about what was included in them that might have caused Fred to vote for or against them?

I think you can look up the specifics here and here.

[redgirlinabluestate]

since there is no RINO past

Not quite. I am not sure why we cannot be truthful about this... None of the candidates are perfect and all have moderate statements and/or actions in their past. Prior posts you may have missed:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1868377/posts?page=423#423

http://www.washingpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/stories/op100797.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1905681/posts?page=49#49

[redgirlinabluestate]

Yours might be a case of classic projection. In any event, I am very confident and assured about my own conservatism as are all who know me. But I would never be so boorish to suggest you are not as good or as authentic a conservative as am I. Ronald Reagan conservatives have more class than that.

So suffice it to say, we will agree to disagree and you can have your brand of conservatism and I'll stick with mine, thanks.

[Michael Knight]

Good catch! Obviously I am not a young spelling bee champion! Actually I’m an engineer, go figure...

[ejonesie22]

Well if your brand is the one supporting Mitt and our brand is the one supporting the real true Reagan Conservatives like Hunter and Thompson, then I have little to worry about.

It is odd that you put out the idea of being a Reagan Conservative yet back a man who eschewed Reagan some years ago and has freely mischaracterized Reagan as being adamantly pro choice. Words do have meaning...

Oh well Red, I am optimistic, I hold out hope for you yet...