There are no such things as "narrow minded" conservatives (fake ones) and "sensible intelligent" conservatives (the true one). There are only conservatives, semi-conservatives, non-conservatives.
I assume by your term "sensible intelligent conservatives" you would lump yourself in that category - no comment.
There are may others that are attempting to hijack the term "conservative" and as in pc America, that is done everywhere.
The so-called "sensible intelligent" conservatives are also called "pragmatic" and mean "since we can't get the votes on conservative ideas, let's split the difference with liberals.
That, my friend is NOT conservative, that is cowardice in the face of the enemy -- and liberalism is the enemy, make no mistake here.
Liberals are out to destroy the U.S., one election at a time!
Out of the bunch, Thompson's record is NOT conservative but does come much closer than the ones on stage last night and Sunday night, since Duncan Hunter was disallowed (why should any candidate be silenced - unless the media doesn't want the American electorate to learn of them and their ideas.
Thompson's own record in the U.S. Senate was NOT conservative but was MORE conservative than John McCain, who is a pro-life, pro-military (sometimes) LIBERAL!
You may speek of "sensible" and "intelligent" as others speak of "pragmatic" but these are code words for giving liberals half of what they want. They love it because today it's half, tomorrow the other half or at least one-third, and before long - it's the whole thing.
Why do you think that they have small splinter groups called "Baby Steps?" Those groups work to attain liberalism one bite at a time.
Sorry to completely disagree with you here in this friendly forum.
It would appear that you have chosen your candidate and regardless of the facts, prefer to call him a "conservative" - more conservative than others in front of the cameras, yes but has voted with liberals on McCain Feingold and not toally against illegal alien hires by corporationos.
I'd be happier w/Thompson than the rest of that bunch of "moderate/liberals" but he'd not be a candidate for whom I'd gladly donate lots of money to nor go door to door to get elected, but who knows, I may fool myself and at least walk door to door for Pubbies again.
Cleanup on aisle 48!!
“Thompson didn’t want to stop companies from hiring illegals.”
I did say sensible and intelligent conservatives that is different from “pragmatic”.
I consider that intelligence/wisdom is the quality required for a true strong positive conservatism when it has to face the complex and various reallity fearless while maintaining some permanent truth working as an order principle....
Conservatism has something to do with truth which founds ethic and a real freedom.
On the opposite the relativist liberalism goes on repeating always the same abstract and fantasmatic principles fleeing away from a reallity it can’t understand and opening the way to servitude.
Then conservatives have to explain their points in order to convince as liberals try to captivate people with soft words and promisses ...
Thompson voted in favor of S.1664, the biggest immigration enforcement bill that came up during his tenure in the Senate. It included provisions for hiring hundreds more investigators in the Labor Dept. to put a stop to employers hiring illegals.
As for conservatism, Hunter is more conservative than Thompson in some areas. Thompson is considerably more conservative than Hunter in others. They’re both good candidates — it just depends on how we each rank our priorities.
I do agree that it was wrong to exclude Hunter, Paul and Keyes from the debate.