Author Topic: Fred Thompson to lead USA  (Read 3187 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jim n Iowa

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 758
Fred Thompson to lead USA
« on: March 14, 2007, 03:08:16 PM »
I look forward to tomorrow, at my age it's not a option. As a Veteran of Vietnam, I can not support the Pelosi movement to abandoning this campaign. We certainly ran from VIET NAM. As to say the names on the wall were wasted has been stated by some of the contenders to the position of the president of the left wing . No doubt our Pres and his staff failed in judgment of this war. Has there ever been a successful one? The Rep from Ind., Pierce stated that if you want to end a war quickly, lose it. A quote from George Orwell. Well we certainly did that in VN.
We have before us Fred Thompson, a very viable GOP candidate, who wants to protect the 1st and 2nd amendment, and support our troops. Check out his stuff on a google as you would a new hunting site, we need to keep watching our back trail.
Jim

Offline muskeg13

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 208
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2007, 07:08:53 AM »
Jim,

I'm not satisfied with the current slate of candidates for President.  While I would never even consider supporting anyone from the party of appeasment and gun control, I'm not happy with the GOP list either.  I agree that Sen. Fred Thompson would make an excellent President, but we've got to convince him to run.  If you haven't done it yet, please go to: http://draftfredthompson.com/index.php and sign the petition. 

For those who aren't sure who Senator Fred Thompson is and what he stands for, the following edited post appeared in full on Free Republic.  the poster is Sturm Ruger. 

courtesy Sturm Ruger

A review of Fred Dalton Thompson's voting record shows that he consistently voted for gun owners (the NRA called him a "staunch supporter of the Second Amendment"), against abortion, for business, against higher taxes, for a balanced budget, for a strong defense, for ANWR drilling, for capping foreign aid, for free trade, for private property rights, for personal retirement accounts, for the Iraq War Resolution and for welfare reform.

Among his interest group ratings, FDT earned a perfect zero from National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action, a perfect 100% from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, only 11% from the ACLU, 85% from the American Conservative Union, 86% from the Center for Security Policy, a perfect zero from the American Federation of Teachers, 6% from the National Education Association, 90% from the League of Private Property Voters, 97% from the National Tax Limitation committee, 88% from the National Taxpayers Union and a perfect zero from the liberal ADA. In a 1995 analysis, Project Vote Smart listed Thompson as having supported Contract With America items 100% of the time.

Even the liberal Washington Monthly, in a 1999 hit piece on Thompson, had to begrudgingly admit that as a Senator, Thompson worked hard to keep his campaign promises. But you'll see many libs posing here as conservatives to slam Fred Thompson. You'll also see Rudy, McCain and Mitt backers dissing FDT because he poses a major threat to them, too, if he gets in the race. 

Fred Thompson is media-savvy, has a commanding presence, enjoys superb name recognition (thanks to his Law & Order and movie roles, as well as pinch-hitting for Paul Harvey on radio) and left the Senate with a solid conservative voting record. He's much like Ronald Reagan in possessing those qualities. Also like Reagan, Thompson is that rare sort of conservative who doesn't scare away moderates and independents. And again like Reagan, he may be the only potential candidate who can unite the factions of the Republican Party right now. Oh, and lest we forget, Ronald Reagan was an actor, too.

Video of the 11 March Fox News Interview:
part 1  http://youtube.com/watch?v=Snw7_6mJf5c
part 2  http://youtube.com/watch?v=cN3z4mqRn7I


Offline jgalar

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2007, 02:08:30 AM »
I like, respect, and mostly agree with the man, but I believe he is unelectable. His openly anti-abortion comments would guarantee at least 50% will not vote for him for that reason.

You need a candidate who has not said much about abortion or who can talk out of both sides of their mouth - Like Hillary and Bill can. ;)

Of those who have announced their plans to run I like Tom Tancredo best so far.
http://www.teamtancredo.org/index.php
http://www.teamtancredo.org/issues.php

Offline Heavy C

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1088
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #3 on: March 23, 2007, 07:51:14 PM »
People are looking for someone that will be a strong leader - someone with conviction.  So he's anti-abortion at least you know where he stands.  Besides that's just one piece of the pie.  I hope he runs for office because the lot we have to chose from doesn't paint a promising picture for this country - Republican or Democrat.

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31302
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2007, 03:27:30 PM »
  So far he sounds OK ..but I am still wondering if he is friendly or hostile to Christians...nowadays it seems,. a candidate must be either one way or the other...Is he friend or foe ?
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline muskeg13

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 208
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #5 on: April 12, 2007, 09:27:04 PM »
Ironglow, you'll have to make up your mind on Fred Thompson, like you need to with every candidate.  Unlike some politicians, Thompson has preferred to keep religious beliefs somewhat private, but that by no means should indicate that he is anti-Christian.  Here's some info on his personal life and a response by a Focus on the Family spokeman in response to a media accusation that Dr. James Dobson was reported to say that Thompson was not a christian.
Best regards, Muskeg

Information on Sen. Fred Thompson's personal life

The son of an auto salesman respected in his community for his unwavering honesty, Fred Thompson was born in Sheffield, Alabama on August 19, 1942 to Fletcher and Ruth Bradley Thompson and grew up in Lawrenceburg, Tennessee in a household of modest means.

A star athlete in high school, Fred excelled in football, basketball and other sports.  After graduation in the spring of 1960, Thompson took a semester away from school, working days in the local post office and nights as an assembly line worker at the Murray Ohio bicycle plant.

Fred began his post-secondary education at Florence State College in Florence, Alabama (now the University of North Alabama), which he attended for three semesters from 1961 to 1962. Thompson then transferred to Memphis State University (now the University of Memphis),  earning his degree with a double major in Philosophy and Political Science in 1964.  Fred worked his way through Memphis State by holding jobs as a shoe salesman and a truck driver. This work ethic, combined with his extensive study of classical philosophy and political science, led young Thompson to a firm belief in conservative ideals.

Fred Thompson was offered scholarships to both Tulane  and Vanderbilt law schools. He accepted the latter, completing his J.D. at Vanderbilt and securing admittance to the Tennessee Bar Association in 1967.  Thompson then returned to his home town of Lawrenceburg and began practicing law with the firm of Lindsey and Thompson.  After two years he was appointed Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee. In this position, he was primarily involved in prosecuting federal and criminal cases in Nashville. During this time, the young lawyer also became involved in local politics.

The marriage of Fred Thompson and Sara Lindsey began on September 12, 1959 when they were both very young (he was just 17), and the couple lived in public housing for a year. It ended amicably in divorce in 1985. They had three children, two of whom are grown sons Tony and Daniel. They lost the third, daughter Elizabeth Thompson Panici at age 38, in 2002 after she failed to come out of a drug-overdose-induced coma. Heartbroken, Fred did not run for re-election to the U.S. Senate.

Fred Thompson is married to Jeri Kehn, a political media consultant at the Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard, and McPherson law firm in Washington, D.C. Kehn, a 1984 graduate of Naperville North High School in Illinois, also worked for the Senate Republican Conference and the Republican National Committee. The couple met at a Fourth of July picnic in 1996 and were married June 29, 2002.  In October 2003, they had a daughter, Hayden Victoria Thompson, and a second child was born in November 2006. Fred also has five grandchildren by the children of his first marriage.
 
Unlike some other contenders for the GOP presidential nomination, Thompson didn't allow his second marriage to overlap with his first wife. Divorced in 1985, Fred didn't meet Jeri Kehn until 1996, and they married in 2002.  The couple are members of the United Church of Christ, a mainline Protestant denomination.  When visiting Jeri's family and friends in Illinois, the Thompsons often return to the church in which they were wed, First Congregational United Church of Christ in Naperville, for Sunday worship services. These church visits by Fred and Jeri are not publicized ahead of time, according to a church staffer.

About his well-known reputation for courting and sparking several young and beautiful women as a bachelor senator in Washington during the years between his two marriages, "I plead guilty," he said in a recent interview with the WSJ's John Fund. "But everyone I knew is still a friend, and if somehow they aren't I guess we'd hear about it. I'm happy with my life partner and children now."

Re:  Dobson's comments
We welcome the opportunity to reply to your comments regarding Dr. Dobson’s remarks that were first reported in Dan Gilgoff’s online article titled “Dobson Offers Insight on 2008 Republican Hopefuls: Focus on the Family Founder Snubs Thompson, Praises Gingrich” (_U.S. News & World Report_, March 28, 2007). At the outset, it’s important to note that this headline is an outright mischaracterization of the views Dr. Dobson expressed. His words weren’t intended as a disparagement of Senator Fred Thompson.

In fact, we can assure you that Dr. Dobson appreciates Senator Thompson’s solid, pro-family voting record and his position that _Roe v. Wade_ was wrongly decided. In his conversation with Mr. Gilgoff, Dr. Dobson, speaking as a private citizen, was attempting to highlight that to the best of his knowledge, Senator Thompson hadn’t clearly communicated his religious faith, and many evangelical Christians might find this a barrier to supporting him. Dr. Dobson told Mr. Gilgoff that he had never met Senator Thompson and wasn’t certain that his understanding of the former Senator’s religious convictions was accurate. Unfortunately, these qualifiers weren’t reported by Mr. Gilgoff. We were, however, pleased to learn from his spokesperson that Senator Thompson professes to be a believer.

Also, it may be of interest to know that Dr. Dobson received a cordial e-mail from Senator Thompson saying that he was surprised initially upon reading the article by Mr. Gilgoff, but then concluded that Dr. Dobson’s remarks had been grossly misrepresented. He urged Dr. Dobson to dismiss the matter and added that he intended to do the same.

In conclusion, let us caution you not to believe what you read about Dr. Dobson in the secular media today. Never in the 30-year history of Focus on the Family has there been more misreporting and outright distortion of his beliefs and teachings. It is apparent that those who represent a liberal worldview seek to marginalize him and confuse our friends. If you ever have a question concerning what you read about Dr. Dobson or our organization, please do contact us for clarification. The chances are you have been misinformed.

Again, thanks for writing. Please pray for Dr. Dobson and this ministry in the days ahead. Grace and peace to you!

Amy Campbell
Focus on the Family Action

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31302
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #6 on: June 03, 2007, 01:03:06 AM »
  Muskeg;

  Thanks for the info ! FDT surely leads the present pack.
  There is much misunderstood about the "Christian Right" as we are labeled..The crowd that views evangelical Christians as "uninformed" or "Neanderthal" (a favorite Lib buzz-word) have much to learn.
    
    Heavens forbid that some "commoner" would tell them that !
  
  While the Christian right is not monolithic in their politics, I am assured many of them believe as I do, in that Christian values are best exhibited by a politician in the way he/she votes and stands on issues, rather than on what church he/she attends or does not attend.
  
   After all, sitting in a church building does not make one a Christian any more than sleeping in a garage makes someone into a Pontiac or a Mercury !
 
  I will watch closely how a politician votes and stands on such issues such as constitutional freedoms, esp the 1st and 2nd amendments..personal property rights, national security and basic honesty !
  
   All persons with a modicum of cerebral function know that "political correctness" is just an advanced way of lying about many subjects.
  
   Many secular-progressives seem to think that the Christian right  could never vote for a Mormon; they are swimming in self-delusion.
  I could more easily vote for a Mormon who holds traditional, Biblical family values (as many of them do), than I could vote for a pew-filler in some dead, "social-gospel" platitude spouting entity !
   Any reservations I have about Mitt Romney are in his flip-flops rather than his Mormonism .
  Yes, evangelical Christians do not agree with Mormon doctrine; but it is miles ahead of the "secular humanism" blather, which is about all the Democrats can offer..even though some of them do claim some church attendance.
  
  No, we are not "one issue" voters..
  
   When we consider the following things as important..where can we place our votes ?
    
   1) National defense/security

    2) First amendment ( freedom of speech/assembly/religion)

   3) Second amendment

   4) Protection for the life of pre-born boys & girls.

   5) Personal property rights.

   6) Govt. spending

   7) Exorbitant taxes

  8) Equal rights for ALL citizens, exclusive, special rights for none & ILLEGAL immigration.

  9).A return to moral values..from neighborhoods to the oval office.

 10) Pres should take a lead in putting the light of TRUTH upon "political correctness".

   These are only 10 of the considerations that are important to Christian, "single-issue" voters..

  Folks, ask yourselves honestly..which party or candidates come closest to filling the bill ?

   To me  FDT looks like the best of the choices from both major parties..so far..
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline muskeg13

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 208
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #7 on: June 03, 2007, 08:50:04 PM »
Quote
#11...border integrity, existing immigration law inforcement. Thompson made is run announcement at a Prescott Bush Awards Gala.  Why should Prescott Bush be memorialized given his involvement in WW2.? My bet is he is a 'stealth' Neocon like W was/is.
....TM7

Please stop throwing out opinionated and unwarranted  labels long enough to listen/read what the man is saying.  Thompson's stand on illegal immigration couldn't be much more opposite from that of Bush's.  Scrap this flawed plan and secure the borders now!Thompson in "the Fred Thompson Report, ABC Radio, 18 May 2007, "The Immigration Bill: Comprehensive or Incomprehensible?" http://abcradio.com/article.asp?id=409614&SPID=15663:

"Most Americans know that we have an illegal immigration problem in this country, with perhaps as many as 20 million people residing here unlawfully. And I think most Americans have a pretty good idea about how to at least start solving the problem – secure our nation’s borders.   

But there’s an old saying in Washington that, in dealing with any tough issue, half the politicians hope that citizens don’t understand it while the other half fear that people actually do. This kind of thinking was apparent with the “comprehensive” immigration reform bill that the U.S. Senate and the White House negotiated yesterday.

I’d tell you what was in the legislation, but 24 hours after the politicians agreed the bill looked good, the Senate lawyers were still writing what may turn out to be a one thousand page document. In fact, a final version of the bill most likely will not be made available to the public until after the legislation is passed. That may come five days from now. That’s like trying to digest an eight-course meal on a fifteen-minute lunch break.

We’ve tried the “comprehensive” route before to solve the illegal immigration problem with a bit more care and deliberation, and the results haven’t been good. Back in May 1985, Congress promised us that it would come up with a comprehensive plan to solve the problem of illegal immigration and our porous borders.  Eighteen months later, in November 1986, that comprehensive plan was signed into law. 

Twenty-two years and millions of illegal immigrants later, that comprehensive plan hasn’t done what most Americans wanted it to do -- secure America’s borders.  Now Washington says the new “comprehensive” plan will solve the problem that the last comprehensive plan didn’t. 

The fact is our border and immigration systems are still badly broken. We were reminded of this when Newsweek reported that the family of three of the men, arrested last week for allegedly plotting to kill American military personnel at Fort Dix, New Jersey, entered the U.S. illegally more than 20 years ago; filed for asylum back in 1989, but fell off the government’s radar screen when federal bureaucrats essentially lost track of the paperwork. Wonder how many times that’s been replicated?

Is it any wonder that a lot of folks today feel like they’re being sold a phony bill of goods on border security? A “comprehensive” plan doesn’t mean much if the government can’t accomplish one of its most basic responsibilities for its citizens -- securing its borders. A nation without secure borders will not long be a sovereign nation.

No matter how much lipstick Washington tries to slap onto this legislative pig, it’s not going to win any beauty contests. In fact, given Congress’s track record, the bill will probably get a lot uglier -- at least from the public’s point of view. And agreeing to policies before actually seeing what the policies are is a heck of a way to do business.

We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders -- or at least made great headway. That would give proponents of the bill a chance to explain why putting illegals in a more favorable position than those who play by the rules is not really amnesty."


Offline muskeg13

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 208
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #8 on: June 03, 2007, 08:56:28 PM »
By the way, unfortunately, Fred Thompson hasn't actually made a run announcement yet, so TM7, you got something else mixed up too.

Offline Casull

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4694
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2007, 10:53:33 AM »
For the vote-for-the-lessor-evil crowd he may well be the man. When I see guys represent themselves as lessor evil candidates I get nervous and think they are in the stealth conservative mode,,,,much as Senor Bush mis-represented himself and posse. I don't really see a return to real conservative principles with these mainstreamer candidates....do you?
Quote

Come on TM7, we all know you are no conservative.  And, I would be very interested in where Thompson has represented himself as lessor of evil candidates. 
Aim small, miss small!!!

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2007, 03:17:21 PM »
I do not consider myself a Republican or Democrat. I am a Loosertarian. I vote for the candidate that is Pro-Constitution and Bill of Rights. However, I do understand TM7's comments on the lesser of two evils concept of voting as I used to participate in such votings. I now vote strictly for the man, and his stand on issues, even if I know he will not win. I vote on principle. I have relatives whom say I waste my vote, but I disagree. I voted for the BEST candidate, he just didn't win, but my conscience is clear.
Whom would you vote for TM7?
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline billy_56081

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8575
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2007, 03:24:10 PM »
In the field that is currently being put forth. He seems to be far and away the best. If fact if he is not nominated I will probably vote third party or abstain from voting in the presidential race.
99% of all Lawyers give the other 1% a bad name. What I find hilarious about this is they are such an arrogant bunch, that they all think they are in the 1%.

Offline Heavy C

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1088
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #12 on: June 04, 2007, 07:04:58 PM »
I believe FDT is the real deal.  Prior to last weeks announcement it was most certainly a lesser of two evils race.  I just hope he follows through and officially announces in July. 

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #13 on: June 05, 2007, 02:35:40 AM »
I don't believe that Mr. Thompson has been very ambitious in congress as far as the bill passing and writing goes, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. I too will wait and see.
Ron Paul is a good man no doubt, but necessarily uncompromising and therefore  unelectable. He also is not a good debator, so comes off bad. If he got on the ticket I would vote for him in a heart beat.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31302
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #14 on: June 05, 2007, 04:09:07 AM »
Duncan Hunter has great credentials..but not the name recognition. He may also be behind in the $$$$$ necessary to even think of running..
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline Casull

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4694
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #15 on: June 05, 2007, 04:58:33 AM »
Not by your measure being an internationalist and neocon and all, but by the founding fathers and constitutional considerations I would say I'm about as conservative as they get. We've discussed your political views and Trotskyite ways in the past,,,,,bomb 'em first and ask questions later and promoting the NWO while hating anything different than yourself certainly doesn't make a conservative.

As for Mr. Thompson and other runners they don't run on the lessor evil platform....duh!   But for those  GOP partyistas he may be the lessor evil. Let's see what he does and has to say...you can save your swipes at me for that time....OK?
Quote

Nice jabs TM7.  BTW, you were the one that said that Thompson was representing himself as a lesser evil candidate (so duh back at you).  Truly I am getting sick with all the "lesser of two evils" commentary anyway.  I don't see Thompson as evil, I see him as the better of two candidates.  Too many people make the argument that "you're still voting for evil".  Come on people, it's just a phrase.  But, I see far too many people saying that if they can't get a candidate that they agree 100% with it, then they will vote third party or abstain.  I've yet to see a candidate that I agree 100% with (Reagan was the closest).  Anyway, for me voting third party is worse than wasting my vote, it is as good as casting a vote for the "greater of two evils" (to coin a phrase).  For obviously, when you vote third party, you are taking a vote away from what you see as the "lesser of two evils" candidate and might as well be giving it to the "greater of two evils" candidate.  Oh well, that's my rant.
Aim small, miss small!!!

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #16 on: June 05, 2007, 07:25:17 AM »
Casull I don't see your comment as a rant, I see it as an opinion on a broken system that you don't see as broken. I for one think a third party is NEEDED to shake up the monopoly the other two have on this broken system. I once worked for a Chief of Police that had been chief for 33 years when I came to the dept. A lot of people saw him as a rock of honesty when in fact, he had compromised himself so many times over the years in an effort to retain his position he was constantly covering up differences he made in his administering law enforcement. In other words some people did not get equal treatment because of their position in the community or what they knew on him.
Our career congressmen and senators are almost to a man in the same position. Does one really think a so so lawyer can go into congress making $150,000.00 a year and 8 to 10 years later be a millionaire. They have compromised themselves over and over, and act according to polls, rather than the morally right thing to do, for the good of the people. They are supposed to be serving us, yet we are serving them. They have over the years strecthed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights so far out of shape with their new laws, bills for their on state FAVORITISIMs, that it is almost unrecognizable.
A third party might hold everyone's feet to the fire and cause accountability to be more the norm rather than the rarity.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #17 on: June 05, 2007, 03:01:07 PM »
If he gets on the ballot he has my vote.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline Casull

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4694
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #18 on: June 05, 2007, 05:52:43 PM »
Dee, if Ron Paul gets the Republican nomination, he will get my vote.  However, having said that, I think that if he does get the nomination and wins, he will not be able to do anything.  He's not respected by either side of the aisle.  For instance, he has sponsered legislation to do away with the income tax and all gun control laws, and was unable to garner even a single co-sponser.  Now let's face it, we all know of some crank democrats who have put forth the luniest of laws, and were still able to gather a couple of co-sponsers.  That tells me that no one is with Ron Paul (I'm talking in the Congress now).  Anyway, I certainly do not see a third party as any kind of saviour for the system.  We had Perot (who ended up giving us Clinton) and we had Nader (who helped Bush get elected - there, that's for you democrats).  A third party is just not viable.  All it does is screw up elections (at least at this time).  I know some of you wish and hope it wasn't so, but I'm just looking at reality.  OK, off my soapbox.   ;)
Aim small, miss small!!!

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #19 on: June 06, 2007, 01:35:20 AM »
Casull, in regards to Perot, if history serves me correctly he quite possibly would have won had he not bailed and then re-entered, which showed his in-decisiveness. We will never know. Your points on luny bills are well taken however. We live in a country where right and wrong, and common sense matter not.
TM7, I noted in an earlier post that in my opinion Paul does not come off well in debates. He, as you say, is not slick. Much of the news media, including the "fair and balanced" ::) Fox network, consider him a nut case. I do however, agree that were he to get elected he, (if he survived) has the demenaor to expose much corruption in D.C. and I believe he would. But, one must face the fact, that today's American has come to like the slick one's with the good personality, ignoring dis-honesty.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2007, 01:39:58 AM »
I will admit that Fred suits my standards--more than most--.
I don't trust Ron Paul...plain and simple---party man from the front too the back and for whatever the party wants--IMO.
I am still undecided but, IFFFFFFF it has to be be a Republican, I want a free thinking Republican, not another script reader.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #21 on: June 07, 2007, 12:13:22 PM »
TM
All that you say has some truth.
His history does not completely comply with his current resume though.
I am going back too when Ron was a Republican when being a Republican wasn't cool.
I would agree that men can and do change---we all do.
I just don't think that his history makes these changes as believable, to me, as it may too others.
My belief is that he will be another spokesman for Republican policy--whoever they are.
Call me a skeptic and I will agree too that.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #22 on: June 08, 2007, 04:52:40 AM »
WL, I have no recollection of Mr. Paul being any of what you describe. Could you be more specific please and name an instance? I have seen him more as a voice of truth in the wilderness. If you know otherwise, please enlighten us on the circumstances, so we do not make a mistake.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #23 on: June 09, 2007, 01:47:35 PM »
Too say that I do not like Ron Paul would be incorrect.
Too say that Ron is not my favorite choice, at this time, would be more correct.
Many people think Ron Regan was the appropriate/ideal Republican--I did not/do not.
I am not a republican because there are many things which THE PARTY wishes too carry out which I think are not in the best interest of most Americans.
The real Republican party throws out bones too America for votes but the substance of the agenda is global rather than national.
I see and hear the agenda Ron promotes--I even admire some of his Libertarian leanings.
I am not convinced that Ron Paul either will or can stand up too the powers of this party.
Ron is also 71 years old and the choice of a running mate would be central in any decision of choice for vote.
Would I vote for Ron?? under circumstances.
I still believe Ron too be a voice of ultra conservative ideals which are not, IMO, the real ideals of the party with which he most commonly associated.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #24 on: June 10, 2007, 01:51:32 PM »
TM
All that you say has some truth.
His history does not completely comply with his current resume though.

What history are you talking about?

I am going back too when Ron was a Republican when being a Republican wasn't cool.
I would agree that men can and do change---we all do.

What are you talking about here? Please clarify.

I just don't think that his history makes these changes as believable, to me, as it may too others.

Once again, what history are you speaking about? Specificly.

My belief is that he will be another spokesman for Republican policy--whoever they are.

I have found him to go against the grain in regards to the Republican business as usual. What are you talking about Specificly?

Call me a skeptic and I will agree too that.

I am not calling you a skeptic, I am saying your statements seem to be coming from someone who knows something but, you are being vague. If Ron Paul has problems, and you know what these problems are, I would like to be made aware of them. My knowledge of Ron Paul is, that he WAS a Libretarian, and switched over to the Republican party, hoping to help it change from within.

Blessings
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline TribReady

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #25 on: June 10, 2007, 06:12:37 PM »
I don't follow this 24/7 like alot of you guys and you're all alot more knowledgeable and informed than me. However, to me Thompson is separating himself from the others....he has the face, name, and likeability.  His politics are conservative enough to get a nomination and he seems to be able to reach moderates.

I'd love a strong third party, but as mentioned, with the media and ignorance of the general populace, it will never be a viable solution.
As much as I seem to understand and support the Libertarian view, the legalization of drugs, open abortion and other "you're on your own" issues just don't resonate with Mr. and Mrs. Rural America.

To me, a normal voter and seeing what's happening in Washington, there is not much difference between the 2 parties.  You have the wacky far left and the far right (where I'm sure I'm in --- Born again Christian, NRA member, "Rich??", military supporter)...but for the most part, the whole of the Congress & Pres. are the same 
A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have. -Thomas Jefferson


...if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.  -2 Chronicles 7:14

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #26 on: June 11, 2007, 01:35:18 AM »
Tribready, like that handle, I wish we could debate your statements but, I agree. Thompson seems ok, but then again he and others like him, make their living pretending to be something and someone, their are not. And he does that very well, doesn't he? It IS very difficult seperating the wheat from the tares, until they get into office, and then it is too late.
I too have problems with abortion, and legalized drugs, although the drug issue is a lesser concern. Washington more or less has dis-connected with the rest of America, in the reality dept. much the same that Hollywood has. They have for some time now began to do things the way THEY want them, and ignore us. I suppose though it is OUR fault, we have let them get away with it, and apathy has done much among the voters to promote this.
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #27 on: June 11, 2007, 01:41:42 AM »
DEE
HIS history in/with the republican party.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline Dee

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23870
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #28 on: June 11, 2007, 02:09:55 AM »
So you don't really have any historical specifics other than he is now a republican?
You may all go to hell, I will go to Texas. Davy Crockett

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31302
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fred Thompson to lead USA
« Reply #29 on: June 11, 2007, 11:48:06 PM »
  It seems that if Ron Pauls candidacy is negated by membership in the Republican party that doesn't leave much to vote for on a national level....
  Since the democrats are more anti-gun owners, anti-Christian, anti-life and more "control-the-masses" oriented than even the Republicans are...

   BTW..To them the "masses" is everyone BUT them; plus their friends in Hollyweird and academia...

   While I agree with the Liberterian stance on many issues, much of it is a bit too much of the anarchist spirit there, for my tastes.
 
   We really do need a military.
 
  We really do need to either fight the drug war...or quit helping those voluntary addicts and let them find their own level with cheap drugs.

    Of the various candidates mentioned so far, Fred Thompson has the closest balance of Libertarian pragmatism and societal needs such as a military, national health issues (raging communicable diseases), defense of the pre-born boys & girls, and enough concern about our soverignty to keep a sharp military and practice preparedness for international issues.
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)