Posted on 12/31/2007 8:45:41 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The campaigns are in the final stretch. The Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary are but days away. In just over a month, the presidential nominees for both major parties will be effectively set, and a nine-month contest for the leadership of our nation and the power to choose between starkly different directions for our republic will ensue.
The Democrat nominee will advocate higher taxes and more government involvement in Americans’ everyday lives. The Republican nominee should advocate lower taxes with greater fiscal accountability, limited government intrusion, and tough law enforcement. Any of the Democrat candidates can advocate their party’s agenda; only Fred Thompson is equipped to carry the Republican banner.
Our government has become a money-hungry behemoth, annually devouring a greater share of taxpayers’ incomes through either direct spending or borrowing against future revenues. It is very adept at collecting taxes and almost completely inept at accounting for its use of those dollars.
In 2001, Senator Fred Thompson, then head of the Senate Government Affairs Committee, published Government at the Brink, a report that detailed flagrant examples of fraud, waste, and abuse in governmental agencies. No other GOP candidate has Thompson’s insight into government accountability. If we are to tame the greedy beast we call a government, that insight is an imperative in the White House.
“Limited government” encompasses the essence of traditional conservatism. The drafters of our Constitution were very specific in limiting the power of the federal government. Over two centuries of legislation and litigation, the limitation has been reversed; today, federal policy trumps state and local preferences. Far-reaching changes to our culture stem from judicial rulings, issued by judges who have lifetime tenure and no accountability to American voters. Our only hope to reverse this trend is to elect a committed conservative -- one who will appoint constructionist judges and restrict the regulatory powers of executive branch agencies -- to lead our nation.
A man documents his values through his actions, not his words. If those actions have been consistent, you can predict how he will respond in most any situation. If his words do not match his record of actions, look beyond the words. Of the remaining Republican candidates, only Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter can claim to be conservatives based on their records. Despite his appeal to evangelicals, Governor Huckabee’s performance in office did not establish his conservative credentials. Senator McCain’s record speaks of his willingness to compromise, which is exactly what led us to the place we are now. Governor Romney has yet to demonstrate conservatism, and Mayor Giuliani hasn’t tried. Congressman Paul’s record is conservative, but he is promoting a platform that he lacks the credibility to deliver.
The next eight years could be pivotal for our nation. The US dollar is at historic lows compared to world currencies. We are borrowing record amounts to prop up our economy. Social Security and Medicare costs will soon exceed our ability to meet demand through current payroll taxes. Our trade deficit will continue to grow because of the weak dollar and trade agreements that penalize American products and make it profitable to export jobs.
In November, we will choose between two candidates. We already know what the Democrat’s plan will be: tax more, spend more, and hope for the best. I hope that Republican primary voters will have the foresight to place a candidate atop their ticket with the knowledge of how to fix what’s broken and the commitment to conservative principles to make the fix -- Fred Thompson!
Yes, but of the 45% reliable GOP voters, a lot of them are not "conservative", at least by the emerging FR standard.
The hard-liners have been very effective in dumping the RINOs. As we are about to see, they can't elect anyone dog catcher by themselves.
I'll stick with 30-35% conservatives - and falling.
Fred in ‘08
His statements show that he does understand it, except for those that show he either hasn't got a clue or is lying about it.
If we lived under a Constitutional government, citizens would have M16's while peace officers would have revolvers. If someone was so dangerous that something stronger than a revolver would be necessary to take them out, the government would enlist the help of armed citizens. Of course, if the government actually followed the Constitution there would be lots of such citizens willing to help.
Aren't police officers "armed citizens"? And wouldn't they be the most likely to be willing and ready to "defend" us, since it is their job? Even in the church where an ordinary citizen saved lives by use of a weapon, she WAS assigned the task of doing so. As I said elsewhere, none of our candidates are calling to repeal existing gun laws that restrict our first amendment rights. They all seem to accept that some weapons can be banned, and we are arguing over exactly which ones. Romney is within 1% of Thompson when you look at every issue involving guns. Romney opposes DC's gun ban, Thompson says it's OK for a state to ban guns on public college campuses. It's illogical to single our Romney on this issue. The NRA rated him a "B" before he became Governor and worked with them to mitigate the harm of the liberal legislature's AWB law. That's not an "A", but it's not an "F" either.
Go Fred! He is the only candidate who will get my vote...
Fred for president, Hunter for Sec of D!
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.