Posted on 01/10/2008 11:51:32 PM PST by neverdem
Fred D. Thompson tried...
--snip--
But it was Mr. Thompson’s performance, in which he shook off the laid-back style that has defined his candidacy, that provided...
“This is a battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party and its future,” said Mr. Thompson, who has staked his run on a strong showing in South Carolina. The primary there is Jan. 19.
“On the one hand,” he said, “you have the Reagan revolution, you have the Reagan coalition of limited government and strong national security. And the other hand, you have the direction that Governor Huckabee would take us in. He would be a Christian leader, but he would also bring about liberal economic policies, liberal foreign policies.”
Mr. Thompson then lit into Mr. Huckabee, the former Baptist preacher and Arkansas governor who won the Iowa caucus, for wanting to close the prison at Guantánamo Bay, for supporting what he called “taxpayer-funded programs for illegals” and for wanting to sign a law restricting smoking.
“That’s not the model of the Reagan coalition, that’s the model of the Democratic Party,” he said.
--snip--
Mr. Thompson leavened his responses with the kind of one-liners that many supporters had hoped he would use sooner.
Asked about the United States response in a confrontation with Iranian speedboats, Mr. Thompson said, “I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins that they’re looking forward to seeing.” At another point, he offered that “you can tell that the news is good coming out of Iraq because you read so little about it in The New York Times.”
He also went after Mr. McCain on immigration.
“I disagree with my friend John McCain on the bill that they proposed last year,” Mr. Thompson said. “I disagree with my friend Governor Huckabee...”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
OK. Thanks moron.
I caught that as well, and my first reaction was a well-reasoned "B***S***"!!!!! How can it be too late, we just got started.
It is total BS.
The electorate is heavily influenced by superficialities. e.g. hair style, youth, looks, etc. But they won't admit it.
If they were honest they'd say something like "I won't vote for him because he looks old and is bald".
But when asked out in the open for all to see they will hide their superficiality.
Thanks for the ping!
He sure is a threat - he is the most conservative and the media, the liberals, democrats and the quasi-Republicans would most hate to see him as the GOP candidate.
Our own party would be against him because of all the GOP abortion proponents, the inroads made into turning the GOP into Demo-lite.
So, as they weaken the party in all their efforts of compromise to accomplish some goal, as they are willing to give up some parts of the conservative agenda in going with a favored “not quite perfect” candidate, the GOP fades away and the country moves more and more to the left.
You can bet those running the party who are mid-road Republicans will not want to turn off their gains and go with a Fred.
Yes, we are a pro-America, pro-gun, pro-personal responsilbility, pro-Constitution, pro-life, pro-All that America stands for lean mean fightin' machine.
What's your point?
You mean Joe “Jeri Thompson works the pole” Scarborough?
I can’t believe he would join up with a weasel like the Huckster. /s
Fred is the only viable candidate with a consistently conservative record. He would be a clear alternative to the Democrat nominee.
Those who now are supporting others in the nomination process would find no legitimate reason to refuse to support him as the nominee, if he continues to present this type of strong showing of conservative ideals as he did in the SC debate.
His nomination provides motivation for conservatives - some of whom are considering not voting - to join the battle, because he does offer that clear conservative choice.
He can win. We can make it happen.
He’s absolutely correct - this is a fight for the heart and soul of the party.
Fred is just a vehicle - the only conservative vehicle left in the debates.
After the MSM convinced two liberal states (notice he did well in Wyoming where Republicans voted) to vote for squishes, and after dirty trickters tried to knock him out with rumors in Iowa and now the absurd accusation of helping McCain, South Carolina is the first step where conservatives will actually not be outnumbered by libs in sheeps clothing.
Conservatism makes a stand here, or we’ve just lost control of the party that elected Reagan and defeated the Soviet Empire.
If we have a chance at all in the General election, it is with a real conservative, not a conveniently recovering life-long liberal, a maverick whose pastime is to enable liberals, an unabashed life-long liberal, or a neophyte statist that things Iran is just acting out because we’re the mean jock and their the band geek.
Choosing one of those dem-lites will be a pyrrhic victory when we’ve surrendered control of a national party for electability only to watch them go down in defeat.
Conservatives make a stand here, or forever hold your peace - I gave another $250 to Thompson last Sunday, and I will give more today.
Reward good conservative performances with donations!
The entire text of the article was 1167 words long. I used all of the 300 words alloted for excerpting to maximize Fred and his statements. If I copied and posted the first sentence, which was the first paragraph, all it would have done, IMHO, was provide fodder for bashing the NY Times and verifying the word count including the "--snip--" additions to the text. I'm tired of that. It offers nothing. That wasn't my point in posting the excerpts. Here's the first sentence and paragraph:
Fred D. Thompson tried to salvage his faltering presidential campaign at a debate Thursday night with a barrage of sharp attacks on the “liberal” policies of Mike Huckabee, the fellow Southerner whom he clearly sees as a rival in the South Carolina primary.
But, the voters aren't supposed to be sharp enough to figure out that is the case!
Someone explain something to me. After the debates last night they had the Luntz group on. They overwhelmingly chose Fred as the winner of the debate and made all the proper statements about his credentials etc. Then when they were asked who they were going to vote for they just as overwhelmingly sided with McCain. They were also asked who should be the nominee for the party and again overwhelmingly went for McCain. I just don’t get it. These people proudly identified themselves as hard core conservatives.
Fred is my second choice and someone I could easily support, but I just don’t get the McCain thing. The man is Bob Dole without the personality. He has tried to repeal the 1st Amendment, open the country up to mass illegal immigration and voted against the Bush tax cuts. He is the definition of the long term Washington insider, is a little too respectful of his Democratic buddies and is a petty and hateful little man and I mean that from a personality standpoint not physical stature. I know he is the darling of the DBM who obviously want him to be the Republican nominee which at this point seems pretty possible. I would think that coziness with the Press would be a red flag for Republicans in general and conservatives in particular, but it doesn’t seem to be.
I have been very open with the fact that he is the one candidate that I can not vote for, but I guess I am part of a small minority in the party and the nation.
I would suggest we do that with all the Republican candidates(except McCain, okay I’m a hypocrite). We have done a great job of viciously attacking a number of nominees on this site. I try to stay away from that though I will discuss issues. Some here seem to think it is their purpose in life to personally destroy candidates they do not support. So let’s call a truce on the hateful attacks on all the candidates. Discuss issues and positions, but no personal attacks. Let’s save our savageness for the Dems this Fall.
I thought this was a thread about how good Fred looked last night, but some of you just can’t resist the Mitt comments can you.
Well since your logic holds that any Republican would be unelectable in general election, it is really irrelevant to a discussion about who is the best candidate in the Republican primary.
You call me a moron when you back who you do? Bwahaahaahaahaahaaha!
LLS
LLS
Fred supporters have treated Mitt/Huck/Romney/Rudy better than the Mitt/Huck/Romney/Rudy supporters have treated Ron Paul. They are all candidates that are dangerous for America and deserve to be treated like Hillary or Obama or any liberal would. Duncan Hunter hasn’t been treated fairly because he is a good man with concservative ideas. If the Republican party could put up a few more like Hunter and Fred instead of the Pu Pu Platter of crap they have given us, perhaps you’d see more civility.
If you think that McCain, Romney and Rudy are the best bets because of electability, then that’s a point of view for sure.
But don’t kid yourself into thinking you are a conservative.
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.