Posted on 01/13/2008 1:01:49 PM PST by TornadoAlley3
Six days before South Carolina Republicans go to the polls, the spat between the Southerners who need to win that crucial primary -- former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee -- continues to get uglier and uglier, even as both men tread more lightly on the candidate who leads the most recent poll in that state, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
"Fred Thompson talks about putting America first, and yet he's the one who is a registered foreign agent, lobbied for foreign countries, was in a law firm that did lobbying work for Libya," Huckabee charged Sunday morning on CNN.
Thompson, who had launched an aggressive attack against Huckabee's record during Thursday night's GOP debate in Myrtle Beach, S.C., responded by insinuating that Huckabee is in truth nastier than his sunny demeanor, is unprepared for the presidency, and is making personal attacks while Thompson is "talking about issues concerning this country."
Huckabee has "raised enough money now to get some hit pieces and dredge up personal stuff and personal accusations against me," Thompson told CNN. "And now you're seeing the real Mike Huckabee come out. So, I think we've done a favor to the American people. Because these are serious times, and they require somebody that knows what they're doing and doesn't walk into a situation with foreign representatives and heads of foreign nations with training wheels on."
Since 1980, no Republican has won the presidency without first winning the South Carolina primary. But in this year's unpredictable GOP contest, with any number of possible nominees and no clear frontrunner, the South Carolina primary has taken on extra importance -- for Huckabee and Thompson in particular.
Huckabee needs to demonstrate that his Iowa caucus victory Jan. 3 wasn't a fluke, and that his scotch-tape-and-rubber-bands campaign is capable of going national. For his part, Thompson needs to win somewhere. Anywhere.
Addressing the substance of Huckabee's charges, Thompson Sunday acknowledged he was "in a law firm that did some lobbying work for Libya," but his involvement was minimal. He said he'd registered with the government because of "five minutes' worth of contribution" to discussions about another client, Haiti.
"It was totally consistent with the policies of this country, where a dictatorship had taken over that country and we were opposing that," Thompson said.
During the Republican debate Thursday night, Thompson -- about whom even his supporters complain of less-than-energetic campaigning -- showed remarkable pep and vigor, attacking Huckabee for having overseen a net tax increase as Arkansas governor, for having pushed merit scholarships for the children of illegal immigrants, and for having suggested he would sign a nation-wide ban on smoking in public places. He took issue with comments Huckabee made that the Bush administration had demonstrated an "arrogant bunker mentality" in its foreign policy.
"On the one hand, you have the Reagan revolution," Thompson said during the debate. "You have the Reagan coalition of limited government and strong national security. On the other hand, you have the direction that Gov. Huckabee would take us in. He would be a Christian leader, but he would also bring about liberal economic policies, liberal foreign policies. .. That's not the model of the Reagan coalition. That's the model of the Democratic Party."
Huckabee didn't respond much during the debate, but appearing on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" Friday morning, he took his well-known wit literally below the belt, joking, "I think Fred needs some Metamucil. I think it would help a lot. He was in a bad mood last night."
Campaigning Friday in Michigan, Huckabee went on the attack more substantively.
"It was real interesting hearing Fred Thompson talk about Ronald Reagan last night," Huckabee said. "Because Fred Thompson supported [then-President] Gerald Ford in 1976 and not Ronald Reagan. He supported [then-Sen.] Howard Baker in 1980 and not Ronald Reagan. I appreciate his recent conversion, but some of us were for Ronald Reagan back in the early days; our legacy goes back a little further."
Huckabee also tried to paint Thompson as having been an undistinguished senator.
"Eight years is a pretty long time to get a check from the federal government and not be able to say" he was responsible for any major legislation, Huckabee said.
On Saturday, Thompson called the criticism of his previous support of Ford and Baker as "kind of silly. Howard Baker was my mentor and personal friend in Tennessee for years and years. If you check the record, Gov. Huckabee supported Democrats on a fairly consistent basis in his days in Arkansas politics. I don't think he wants to get into that discussion. We'll see."
Of Huckabee's Metamucil's joke, on Sunday morning Thompson said "his response was to return fire with some potty humor. That's the best he could come up with for the last three days."
He added that he was happy to compare his record to Huckabee's, whom he described as "having raised taxes $500 million more than he cut." He described Huckabee's criticisms of the Bush administration as "blame-America-first comments," and pointed out, correctly, the Huckabee campaign chairman Ed Rollins had called the Reagan coalition dead.
Huckabee, Thompson charged, "talked around the subject and smiled and giggled and told a couple of jokes. When I came back, I said, 'You know, this is about the heart and mind of the Republican Party, because I don't believe it [the Reagan coalition] is [dead].'"
Said Huckabee, "The Writers Guild strike needs to end soon. Fred's got to get some better lines. Calling me a liberal would be laughable in Arkansas, where people recognized -- if anything, they called me this ultra-conservative guy. ... It's always interesting to me, when people get desperate, they start grabbing for anything."
Thompson responded that he had been asking questions about Huckabee's support for closing down the prison at Guantanamo Bay, his support for public programs for the children of illegal immigrants, and the fact that he was endorsed by a teachers' union.
"These are substantive issues," Thompson said. "These are not personal attacks. If the governor wants to get into personal attacks and things that happened some years ago and things that they've done and allegations, there's enough on the record in Arkansas that will keep us busy for the rest of this campaign."
Or at least until Saturday.
Then the huckster’s previous support for illegal amnesty and bringing the Guantanamo detainees to our soil and treating them to constitutional rights is a great indicator of how non-conservative he is and what a threat he is for national security. Again, we are electing a president at a critical juncture in history. We are not electing a pastor for a congregation. Huckabee is no conservative.
I think it was Fred who first questioned Huckabee’s conservative bona fides regarding Reagan. Maybe he should check his own resume.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold on a second. I would wager those who supported Ford over Reagan primarily did it because Ford was the incumbent, not necessarily because Ford was their ideological hero.
C'mon, folks. Cut people some slack. G.W. Bush wasn't every Republicans' cup of tea in 2004--but he was supported by most because he was the incumbent!
Reagan came close, but he lost. And when he did, he supported the Republican nominee.
I still say whoever the Republican nominee is, I will support them. ANY OF THEM WOULD BE BETTER THAN HITLERY, HUSSEIN OBAMA, OR THE BRECK GIRL!
Okay a lousy minority counsel then, just like he was a lousy chaiman of the chinagate hearings
Yup. Pretty disgusting that she’s comparing what’s happening to her in a political campaign and what happened to mankind’s Savior.
Um...source for the Libya item. You're getting confused in your Googling. See my earlier post for the Haiti problem. He did work for Aristide in '91 according to your article.
I mean if you want to compare Huck's relationships with murderers and Fred's, Huck would probably win that one, too, in volume.
Why is it when Huck commutes sentences of murderers we need to understand the nuances of the situation? And when he raises taxes we "just don't get" that the "courts made him do it"? And when he opposed vouchers "it was a very specific action in response to X, Y, and Z. He's really for vouchers." But Fred's LAW FIRM does some lobbying for Libya (for some unspecified reason) and somehow Fred's a bad guy? No sale.
Then, let’s put it this way. The conservatives who put their money (and reputation) where their mouth’s were, supported Reagan.
Bwhahahahahahahaha! That just may be the most ridiculous post in FR history. Jefferson and Adams would have considered Huck a complete idiot. And they would have been right.
Good enough for me. Why does the Huckster equate more legislation with good government? The less legislation the better ... well, unless you're a socialist like the minister here who through potty humor and disingenuous one-liners would force his brand of theological socialism on us all.
I have found many statement about Huck on FR to be extraordinarly based in fact.
Even though he was still pro-choice at that time?
No, that would be the democrat approach and attitude. Take away the amenities. The living conditions don’t have to be harsh, but they can be very plain and simple. The huckster’s attitude is the same as Bush’s in that we must show that we are being compassionate and respectful toward the detainees. The huck takes it one step further and goes for the democrat approach of shut it down, bring them all here or let them go and the world will like us. Screw world opinion and don’t put us into the situation of having terrorists thinking that they can mount an attempt to free detainees because they are on our soil and covered under our constitution. They don’t try to physically free them because they are located on the Cuban island and won’t dare try to come in from either the sea or by land.
Thompson was working ``in connection with efforts to obtain the restoration of the democratically elected government’’ of Haiti, the records say.
You think? If you have a quote, post it and let's examine it. Who has the record and consistent positions closest to the principles of RR? Of the major candidates, I think that man is Fred Thompson.
Are you trying to say that Ronald Reagan was pro-abortion to try to cover for your pro-abortion candidate? That’s disgusting. You make me sick.
Evidently you didn’t watch the debate.
Howard Baker’s 1976 platform:
In 1979 Baker made a bid for the 1980 Republican presidential nomination. As a perennial opponent of big government, he ran on a platform of limited government controls. He promoted a four-year plan to cut income taxes, and he staunchly opposed wage and price controls for industry. He favored cutbacks in federal spending and the imposition of spending limits for the federal government, and he supported a “windfall profits” tax for oil companies to pay on excessive profits.
By March of 1980 it was clear that former actor and California Governor Ronald Reagan would win the Republican nomination, but Baker was under consideration as a vice-presidential candidate on the Reagan ticket. He never did receive the vice-presidential nomination, but a landslide victory by Ronald Reagan in the election of 1980 brought with it the added benefit of a Republican majority in the Senate. Baker won reelection as the Republican Party leader, to become the Senate Majority Leader in 1981. Two years later he was elected once again. He served as Majority Leader of the Senate until he retired from the legislature in 1985.
http://www.bookrags.com/Howard_Baker
And more:
An informal, rumpled, unthreatening man, the 61-year-old former Senator made a career out of being a conciliator, bringing together disparate factions and cajoling them into agreements that led to legislation. It was this quality that led to his election in 1977 as Senate Republican leader and his elevation to majority leader in 1981, when the Republicans won control of the Senate.
His skills were sorely tested. Mr. Baker reconciled the liberal and conservative wings of his party and then reconciled the President’s goals with those of the Senate Republicans. At the same time, he won the respect and affection of Democratic leaders of both the House and Senate. He was fond of putting opponents in the same room for all-night sessions and was instrumental in orchestrating the President’s many victories on the Hill.
‘’He’s a genius at finding the compromise point and pushing it through,’’ said Senator Jim Sasser, Mr. Baker’s Democratic colleague from Tennessee.
President Reagan frequently acknowledged Mr. Baker’s role. ‘’I’m frank to say that I don’t think we could have had the successes that we’ve had up there without his leadership,’’ the President once told a reporter.
Although the two men were not socially close, Mr. Baker considered himself the President’s lieutenant on Capitol Hill. He said today that he made a conscious decision ‘’that I would be Ronald Reagan’s spear carrier in the Senate.’’
‘’Anytime there was a matter on which we disagreed, where I felt very keenly, as a matter of conviction and philosophy, I let him know that, and someone else handled it,’’ Mr. Baker said. ‘’But that was very rare.’’
Indeed, although Mr. Baker’s gave the impression of being politically moderate, his voting record was conservative even before he became President Reagan’s man on the Hill and helped arrange the curtailment of dozens of social programs.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE6DC143CF93BA15751C0A961948260
The Huckabee folks should stop disparaging good men who did a great service to the conservative cause just to build up their own guy.
Most likely, they know nothing about history, and just spew made-up nonsense to back their boy.
Can’t Huckabee stand on his own record and not tear down and smear others to make himself look good?
Chuck Norris.
And Reagan's 2 biggest opponents were Bush and Baker. He put both of them in his administration, including VP. I guess Reagan stopped being a conservative on January 20th, 1981 by your estimation.
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.