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!
Well, at least it won’t be the RINO abortionist Rudy Giuliani! Thank God for the conservative grassroots!!
Go, FRed, Go!!
Right on brother, Right on !
“The fact is, they KNOW he would be very tough to beat and so they are doing everything they can to try and stop him early on.”
You’re kidding... The MSM is barely even speaking about Fred. It’s as if he doesn’t exist. That hardly qualifies as doing everything they can to try and stop him early on. They are trying to stop Romney and promote the Huckster and McInsane, but they don’t even mention Fred. That’s because they think he is going nowhere fast.
“I like many others would say, the RINOs are still RINOs and won’t get my vote under any circumstances.”
A fool and his vote are soon parted.
“Republicans in congress would actually work to block Hillary’s socialist agenda. They would go along with the same agenda if proposed by Romney, or Rudy, or McCain.”
If Hillary wins, then we will undoubtedly also lose our veto-proof majority in the Senate and everything Hillary would come up with would pass. Go ahead, let Hillary win, and then see what a pickle your country ends up in.
So I take it you're voting for Mitt because he is the best looking?
!!!
They know what they are doing, but you don't seem to have a clue.
The mainstream media is smothering Fred. The other, yes, you can say they get negative press, but so what? IN politics, press cover is everything. There is NO "bad" press.
By the way, have you ever heard the term "subliminal leitmotif"? If you don't mention something, you create the clear impression, that might not even be recognized conciously, that the subject is not worthy of attention.
“By the way, have you ever heard the term “subliminal leitmotif”? If you don’t mention something, you create the clear impression, that might not even be recognized conciously, that the subject is not worthy of attention.”
Here’s the real leitmotif, it appears Fred is going nowhere. And it doesn’t appear to be subliminal, but actual. We’ll see after Iowa and New Hampshire who is right, you and your leitmotif or me.
You may be right, that it not the issue. The issue is that the press has sandbagged the man, unfairly, and with truly evil intent. He may go nowhere, and it is our loss.
I’m sure Romney and Huckabee are betting that you are correct.
Thanks to you and others like you, sorry, but we're ALREADY in a pretty serious pickle.
Still bitter that Fred decided to go on Leno instead of going to your debate in September?
What debate? What are you talking about?
That is fine, but there’s something illogical about a group of people who are conservatives, not republicans, always complaining about how other people are RINOs.
BTW, if Hillary Clinton was nominated by the Republican Party, it would mean that a majority of the people who identify themselves as Republican prefer her to any other candidate.
If that were the case, she WOULD represent the Republican party. And of course, it wouldn’t be a party I was part of.
It wasn’t easy for me to decide to join the Republican party apparatus. And if I get to where I don’t think the Republican party is sufficiently conservative that I can commit to supporting a vast majority of their candidates, I will resign my position.
But I won’t pretend to be a republican is I’m really an independent whose candidate happens to be running in the republican primary this time.
It’s funny when you say “everything from abortion to gun control”, as if those are the two ends of a liberal spectrum like A to Z and he was talking about all of them.
He never defended a liberal position on gun control, and the only other issues where he defended a position that would be considered liberal was abortion and civil rights for gays, and on the 2nd he wasn’t that far off from the mainstream conservative view that gays should not be punished for being gay but also shouldn’t be treated special.
As the National Review pointed out, Romney was NEVER as liberal as those who attack him pretend he was, and he also never GOVERNED as liberal as he spoke, especially given his conversion to the pro-life cause which effectively put him on the conservative side of the first major test he had on that issue, stem cell research.
For example, given his 1994 speeches about abortion rights, and his 2002 statements that he wasn’t looking to change existing law, a lot of people were surprised when he vetoed the morning-after-pill bill.
That wasn’t reneging on a promise, since it was a new bill, and that was a conservative position on that bill, a pro-life act.
Anyway, I can’t help what other people think is the case, I can only present the facts, and some people will still consider those facts damning, and that’s their perogative.
Bingo!
That wasn't my statement you quoted.
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.