GOP Pres. candidate Fred Thompson
I read with interest the News’ report that GOP Presidential candidate Fred Thompson is “failing to galvanize GOP’s core voters” (Oct. 1). Seems like you in the press are eager to quash Thompson’s campaign before it barely gets started-a sure sign to us conservatives that he’s on the right track.
You can count me as one GOP core voter whose interest in the presidential race has been rekindled by Thompson, a conservative in the tradition of Ronald Reagan who possesses Reagan’s appealing plain-spoken, no-nonsense style.
This letter has not been edited.
Nixon called him stupid but friendly. I guess that's your kind of candidate eh?
Posted by Charles B. on October 9, 2007 02:32 PMFred Thompson the actor and empty suit. Just the type of candidate the elite bankers need for a new presidential puppet.
Posted by Biz on October 9, 2007 02:36 PMOh great. Another acting president.
Posted by Stan B on October 9, 2007 02:57 PMthats what cons do best is act. and boy have been fooling alot of people.
Posted by larry on October 9, 2007 03:06 PMI'd rather listen to Fred act than have to listen to that Hillary cackle for four years.
Posted by KW on October 9, 2007 04:13 PMtalk about acting and you must include hillbilly in that. now she is on to another milti billion per year feel good issue with her 401 government sponsered savings accounts for you libs who wont save on your won. one more for redistrubution of wealth to the low lifes who have their hands out.
she even trasher billie's best idea on fixing SSI, by using private accounts, but she wants to be queen and rule the country. go dums and vote for it and then when there is no money but yours to pay for it I guess the program will die.
Anthony,
It has been the media that has been defining Thompson as a "Ronald Reagan" style conservative. My question to you is, do you understand what that means, or have you swallowed the whole Fred Thompson marketing campaign without critically looking at the candidate himself?
I am not saying this to bash Thompson-- he may or may not be a good candidate. But he has been extremely bashful in defining his core positions, and has been enigmatic in some of his policy comments and historical recollections.
Because the media hasn't defined "Ronald Reagan Conservative" beyond an easily-absorbed catch phrase, what qualities of Thompson exactly match those of Reagan?
Posted by Dan on October 9, 2007 05:53 PMPhony Fred joined a long list of '08' prez GOP draft dodgers and whoremongers. Some fit into more than one cartegory. My favorite is Mitt Romney. I challenge those investigative sleuths at newspapers CSU Collegian and CSU College Republicans (Future Draft Dodgers of America-FDDA)/Ram Republic, to investigate Mitt's felonious draft dodging. When NAM broke-out, Mitt broke for his Mormon mission. Mitt's pappy was a Nixon cabinet member.
The U.S. Selective Service Board outlawed religious conscientious draft deferments. Black Muslim Elijah Muhammad sought one and he was rewarded for efforts by being sentenced to 3 years in federal prison. His son, Wallace D. Muhammad sought one too, YEP! Wallace was sentenced to 3 years in federal prison too. Elijah was Muhammad Ali's religious advisor. Based on this math, Mitt owes the brothers 3 years (affirmative action-AA) in SuperMAx, Canon, CO.
USSC Judge AA Alito should join Mitt. Alito is a US Army ROTC program UCMJ-felon; AWOL, deserter, and guilty of illegal separation and discharge. Alito fleeced, pimped, and exploted taxpayers with 7 years of free college education (JD/undergrad degrees). Alito blew off his 11 years active military duty obligation. He is using his federal clerk job as his ruse. The brothers in SuperMax would welcome Alito with open arms.
Posted by draftdodgingisntafamilyvalue on October 9, 2007 05:55 PMBetter Fred than Hillary! Tax cuts v. tax hikes, I made my choice!
Posted by Hank on October 9, 2007 06:35 PMThis guy is an empty suit and a do-nothing. Even his constituents have said so.
Better Hillary than Fred! Economic stability and a strong dollar v. tax cuts for the wealthiest 1%, I made my choice.
Posted by Bush on October 9, 2007 06:57 PMBush, I suppose you mean the strong Canadian dollar?
Posted by Stan B on October 9, 2007 07:48 PMFred's already been president. His name then was Gerald Ford.
Posted by leftside on October 9, 2007 09:12 PMWhat is the Republican Party's obsession with these hollywood types? Another actor? Please how about a real leader instead of a bad actor? Funny, the conservatives are always bitching about these hollywood types who spout off on causes or against the President..yet the Republicans keep electing actors!!! Reagan, and Arnold, and now Fred ( who Nixon identified as not being very bright).
Posted by SeanPenn on October 10, 2007 07:00 AMStan B,
Are you trying to imply that the value of the U.S. dollar would fall under Hillary's presidency?
Now really.
Can she really do any worse that George Bush has? She IS a hell of a lot smarter than he is. She earned her degrees honestly.
The dollar has fallen about 30 percent against the euro in the last year alone.
Posted by Thomas on October 10, 2007 07:44 AMYes, Hillary is another brilliant socialist. Her $5000 dollar give away to every egg sucking welfare mom, every illegal alien, and every irresponsible "single" parent pushing out a baby....brilliant. Economists were astonished at her grasp of the issues. Does your socialist utopia include free houses, haircuts, shoes, and health care in the thought free, responsiblity free existense? There is a special camp for special people in socialist utopias. Enjoy riding the pink ponys in the field.
Posted by Tom on October 10, 2007 07:56 AMFred Thompson was a federal attorney for years. At least he has had a job, most of these candidates don't know what work is....
Posted by T on October 10, 2007 08:07 AMseanpenn isn't it amazing how hollyweird is the bastion of communism and debauchery until the repubs find a candidate who used to be part of that establishment then it automatically becomes a suburb of the reddest heartland?Isn't there a word for that, starts with H?
Posted by patrick on October 10, 2007 09:07 AMSorry Patrick. You are trying to prop up a strawman for your argument. In every group of people defined by job, education etc, there will be people with different viewpoints.
The "hollywood" crowd, made up of actors, directors, etc are vastly liberal. There are a few conservatives. Just like the vast majority of Montanans are conservative, with some libs thrown in. Yes, they sometimes vote democrat, but not for a leftist dem.
So, Fred and a few others are or were actors. So what? Does that make them ineligible to run? As long as Fred wants to run, he can. If he runs against the Hildabeast, I will vote for him.... Truthfully, I would vote for a ham sandwich over the Hildabeast.
Posted by Dravur on October 10, 2007 09:40 AMSeanPenn - Wasn't Arnold elected gov in an extremely deep blue state? Obvioulsy many, many dems voted for him so that situation was hardly the "reps obsession" with electing an actor.
T - Spot on. He has also served as a US Senator (2 terms?) so his polictical resume is at least as strong as Hillary or Obama. Maybe even stronger.
Dan - Considering Fred has only recently annouced his intent to run, isn't it a bit early to say he's been (as in past tense) "bashful" in defining his core positions?
If we use that measuring stick to weigh Obama, we'd have to say he falls well short of Fred. I'm still trying to get straight answers from Obama about what platform he'll run on and he annouced his run shortly after the last election.
Posted by KW on October 10, 2007 10:05 AMYep them actiors make great Republican candidates. Even Fred admitted there were more and better actors on the debate stage yesterday than he was ( Rotten Dudy and Mit deserve Emmys). I will give Lazy Fred credit for staying awake through the entire debate. Maybe he can grab on the Boston Legal stars for his VP. Bill Shatner would be perfect, or Candace Bergen and get he ladies vote. I never thought Id agree with Nixon but he got this one pegged right...Fred really isnt very bright.
Posted by SeanPenn on October 10, 2007 11:28 AM"I will vote for him" says Dimvur. An empty head opting for an empty suit. A match made in heaven!
Posted by on October 10, 2007 12:38 PMIts true that Dravur and others like him would vote for a ham sandwich. thats obviously how we ended up with the current pig in the Whitehouse. Ham sandwich = pig = Bush. Cheney would be the Rocky Mountain oysters piled high alongside the Bush pork. Tho I would guess the ham sandwich has a huigher IQ than George W Bush, even if its fatty ham.
Posted by Chef Tony on October 10, 2007 12:52 PMI hope whoever gets elected president would focus on the national debt. To hell with campaign retoric (I'll cut taxes, cut spending, make health insurance, housing, etc. affordable, apple pie-in-the-sky). The national debt has shot up over 50% in the last six years to $9.1 trillion and growing. We can't make a dent on the INTEREST on that amount.
Posted by Stan B on October 10, 2007 12:59 PMAmen, Stan...
The problem is that conservatives have that
"not my problem" mentality.
They'll only care about it if and when they have to pay it themselves.
Look how many conservatives were draft dodgers. It's ingrained in them. They obviously believe that other people should pay the costs for everything we, as Americans, have.
They see things like our record national debt, the long term effects of pollution and global warming, our nation's relationship with and reputation in the global community..among other things..as the problems they will leave to their children and yours so that they fulfill their own selfish desires.
But that goes to the root of conservatism. How can anyone plan for the future because they're always living in the past?
Posted by Thomas on October 10, 2007 03:09 PMThe "Reagan" crowd goes ga-ga over another mediocre actor with a slim resume. Yawn.
Posted by drew on October 10, 2007 03:27 PMdrew - Wouldn't Fred's resume be about equal to that of Hillary or Obama?
Thomas - You do like to label people and paint them with a broad brush. To you, anyone who considers themselves "conservative" is this way or that. No exceptions.
Would it be fair for me to label all gays that way?
Posted by KW on October 10, 2007 04:51 PMI'm a selfish conservative/liberai with no respect for the points of others. Damn, I wished I'd never have kissed Sherry, when I was six years old (and she was five). I hope that "galvanized" our relationship. Now, I'm a hopeless heterosexual!
I hope we don't do a Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton thing, but, I guess, that's the way it goes. How did you get your wealth so quickly? American voters have amnesia!
Posted by Stan B on October 10, 2007 08:42 PMI notice Fred's pretty wife is wearing clothing clear up to her chin. Last time I saw a picture of her in a dress, she was inches from falling out.
Now she strolls in carrying their child all dressed in dark colors and very demure.
too funny.
Posted by Sharon B. on October 12, 2007 11:48 AMKW,
Isn't that what you conservatives do already when it comes to gay people?
Or are the attempts to enshrine religiuos superstitions in the Constitutions of both the United States and those of each State as well concerning "marriage" NOT a form of "broad brush"?
Please explain - in logical terms - how "marriage" between two people of the same gender actually "threatens" the whole culture, or the whole institution of marriage itself, or - just for fun = how it actually "threatens" your own marriage, or that of someone in your family, or someone you know?
And that's just ONE example among very many.
Posted by Old Grouch on October 12, 2007 02:44 PM