All I Want for Christmas Is Fred Thompson

North Star Writers Group ^ | December 17, 2007 | Paul Ibrahim

[Invisigoth]

Mitt Romney said it best in last week’s debate: “We're not going to get the White House nor strengthen America unless we can pull together the coalition of conservatives and conservative thought that has made us successful as a party. And that's social conservatives. It's also economic conservatives. And foreign policy and defense conservatives.”

[GregB]

Yes that is all I want no matter what all the talk show say even Ann Coulter.

[LadyNavyVet]

Great article. Sums up my feelings exactly. He makes an interesting point about FactCheck.org. I went to the website and read their post debate analyses and couldn’t find Thompson mentioned at all. Like him or not, the man is honest. The obfuscaters in the debates are Huckabee, Giuliani and Romney. Which makes sense because none of the three can tell the whole, unvarnished truth about how they governed without turning off conservative voters in droves, and they all three know it.

[samtheman]

I agree with all of this but I do wish Fred would go on the attack more. He should start calling the others what they are: socialists in conservative clothing.

[Clintons Are White Trash]

Bingo!!

[BubbaBasher]

What he said!

[Politicalmom]

PING!!

Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference

WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.

[David]

How firm is Thompson on Second Amendment rights?

The discussion above about Romney's position on the issue is very helpful.

[gridlock]

John McCain and Mitt Romney do reach at least the outer rings of social, fiscal, and defense conservatism. And McCain does deserve major props for speaking out against agricultural subsidies right smack in the middle of Iowa, while Giuliani and Romney did the opposite only a few weeks ago.

This was a smart move by McCain. If Fred Thompson does not think he will come in at least second in Iowa, he should do the same, loudly, so he can talk down his poor showing.

Plus, it is the right thing to do.

[LadyNavyVet]

Fred’s Senate record according to ontheissues.org:

Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)

[lesser_satan]

Whenever he does, all the Huckababies cry about how mean everybody is being to their candidate.

[Aria]

WOW....the whole case in one column. How widely read is this guy?

[Utah Binger]

[Beagle8U]

“How firm is Thompson on Second Amendment rights? “

When Fred ran for Senate Charlton Heston( NRA President) personally went to Tenn to campaign for him!

That should tell you all you need to know on that issue.

[greyfoxx39]

From the article: Romney today claims many of the positions that would be widely considered to be “conservative.” But he did start claiming them only a couple of years ago. Even if you wholeheartedly trust that Romney’s conversions are sincere and not resultant of political convenience, you must inevitably worry that once he sits in the Oval Office, he is just as capable of having legitimate conversions on any issue and in any direction. It takes too much faith to jump these hurdles, and for many, the four-year leadership of the free world is not worth the risk.

This leaves us with Fred Thompson, who, ironically, is the candidate best described by Romney’s words about the Republican tripod. In short, Thompson holds the same conservative positions of all the other candidates combined, and has none of their flaws. In fact, any close observer of the campaign season would tell you that Thompson has been on the receiving end of barely any substantive attacks on policy issues. This is no coincidence. And it is the reason he has had to bear the brunt of shallow attacks about his demeanor, campaigning style, and laziness (whatever that mean

I like your graphic.