12.28.07
Fred - The “Substance” That the GOP Needs
Now airing in Iowa, “Substance” was made possible by Fred supporters who believe that he is the best hope for a solid, conservative President in this election cycle. It’s time for America’s Conservative base to turn away from the modern day Republican status quo and embrace those things which are the roots of Conservatism and the Republican party of Ronald Reagan. It’s time to return the GOP to the glory of small and unobtrusive government that lies at the heart of all true Conservatives out there.
The mainstream media has refused to anoint Fred because they fear what he represents. They fear the fact that he isn’t part of the corrupt political class. They fear the fact that he doesn’t play their childish games or bow to their ridiculous agendas. They fear him because he is in this race for the American people rather than the popularity or media causes; and that is something they cannot fight against.
An endorsement of Fred is a break from the devastating direction that the Republican party has taken in recent years. A vote for Fred is a vote to return America to federalism and and limited government - that which America was intended to be.
It’s time to change our course. It’s time to vote for America.
FRedStates.com said,
December 28, 2007 at 11:51 pm
As Huckabee continues to self-destruct and Romney goes negative (which Iowans reportedly don’t like) Fred Thompson continues pressing the flesh on the very cold Iowa Campaign trail… and people are realizing that with Thompson you don’t have to compromise…
McCain is a honorable man but his stance on illegal immigration leaves much to be desired
Giuliani is very Liberal on many social issues… it’s strange he’s even running as a Republican…
Romney appears to have figured out what a conservative is but joined up only a couple years ago.
Huckabee? Wow… Fred said it best… a pro-life Liberal… and with his numerous gaffes on foreign policy issuess (wait… this just in… another one… claimes he’s been consulting with John Bolton however Bolton says he’s never spoke to Huckabee… Huckabee’s campaign clarifies and says Mike did send an email to Bolton)
Then you are left with Fred Thompson… strong on the basics… pro-life… wants a strong military… lower taxes… tough immigration stance that includes finishing the fence and English as the official language not to mention his excellent plan on tax reform and economic growth AND he’s got a plan to address the Social Security nightmare… and he’s been a conservative his entire political career…
Like I said… with Thompson… there’s no compromise…
http://www.FRed08.com
Arm Jerker J. said,
December 29, 2007 at 7:49 am
Our company endorsed Huckabee…
Let’s just say, all I want to say, can’t be said here…
*shivers*
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-gopprezrec_23edi.ART.State.Edition1.36c79ca.html
Radiant Times said,
December 29, 2007 at 5:34 pm
My friend, Fred doesn’t care about the presidency. Read the article yourself or my commentary on it.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071229/NEWS/71229011/-1/RSS22
http://radiantsong.blogspot.com/2007/12/i-guess-fred-is-done.html
FRedStates.com said,
December 30, 2007 at 1:30 am
Okay Radiant Times… I read the quotes reported in the Des Moines Register… perhaps you should read the entire transcript of what was said… then you will see how horribly these comments were taken out of context.
******************
Voter: My only problem with you and why I haven’t thrown all my support behind you is that I don’t know if you have the desire to be President. If I caucus for you next week, are you still going to be there two months from now?
Fred Thompson: In the first place I got in the race about the time people normally get into it historically. The fact of the matter is that others started the process a lot earlier this time than they normally do. I think it was for some of them when they were juniors in high school.
APPLAUSE
That is a very good question, not because it’s difficult to answer, because, but I’m gonna answer it in a little different way than what you might expect.
In the first place, I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t. I wouldn’t be doing this if i didn’t. I grew up very modest circumstances. I left government, I and my family have made sacrifices for me to be sitting here today. I haven’t had any income for a long time because I’m doing this. I figure that to be clean you’ve got to cut everything off. And I was doing speaking engagements and I had a contract to do a tv show, I had a contract with abc radio like I was talking about earlier and so forth. I guess a man would have to be a total fool to do all those things and to be leaving his family which is not a joyful thing at all if he didn’t want to do it.
But I am not consumed by personal ambition. I will not be devastated if I don’t do it. I want the people to have the best president that they can have.
When this talk first started, it didn’t originate with me. There were a lot of people around the country both directly and through polls, liked the idea of me stepping up. And of course, you always look better at a distance, I guess.
But most of those people are still there and think its a good idea. But I approached it from the standpoint of a deal. A kind of a marriage. If one side of a marriage has to be really talked into the marriage, it probably ain’t going to be a very good deal for either one of them. But if you mutually think that this is a good thing. In this case, if you think this is a good thing for the country, then you have an opportunity to do some wonderful things together.
I’m offering myself up. I’m saying that I have the background, the capability, and the concern to do this and I’m doing it for the right reasons. But I’m not particularly interested in running for president, but I think I’d make a good president.
Nowadays, the process has become much more important than it used to be.
I don’t know that they ever asked George Washington a question like this. I don’t know that they ever asked Dwight D. Eisenhower a question like this. But nowadays, it’s all about fire in the belly. I’m not sure in the world we live in today it’s a terribly good thing if a president has too much fire in the belly. I approach life differently than a lot of people. People, I guess, wonder how I’ve been as successful as I’ve been in everything I’ve done. I won two races in TN by 20 point margins, a state that Bill Clinton carried twice. I’d never run for office before. I’ve never had an acting lesson and I guess that’s obvious by people who’ve watched me. But when they made a movie about a case that I had when I took on a corrupt state administration as a lawyer and beat them before a jury. They made a movie about it and I wound up playing myself in the movie and yeah I can do that.
And when I did it, I did it. Wasn’t just a lark. Anything that’s worth doing is worth doing well. But I’ve always been a little bit more laid back than most. I like to say that I’m only consumed by very, very few things and politics is not one of them. The welfare of our country and our kids and grandkids is one of them.
If people really want in their president a super type-a personality, someone who has gotten up every morning and gone to bed every night and been thinking about for years how they could achieve the Presidency of the United States, someone who can look you straight in the eye and say they enjoy every minute of campaigning, I ain’t that guy. So I hope I’ve discussed that and hope I haven’t talked you out of anything. I honestly want - I can’t imagine a worse set of circumstances than achieving the presidency under false pretenses. I go out of my way to be myself because I don’t want anybody to think they are getting something they are not getting. I’m not consumed by this process I’m not consumed with the notion of being President. I’m simply saying I’m willing to do what’s necessary to achieve it if I’m in sync with the people and if the people want me or somebody like me. I’ll do what I’ve always done in the rest of my life and I will take it on and do a good job and you’ll have the disadvantage of having someone who probably can’t jump up and click their heels three times but will tell you the truth and you’ll know where the President stands at all times.
******************
By the way… the reporter who filed this original story was not even at the event she was reporting about.
Find out more: http://fredfile.fred08.com/blog/2007/a-message-from-the-campaign-trail/
Defcon5 said,
December 30, 2007 at 3:22 am
Whaaaaaat? You can’t be serious!! You mean to tell me the mainstream media went and quoted something completely and blatently out of context in an effort to smear a presidential candidate? NO WAY! SAY IT ISN’T SO!! They’ve shattered my image!
This is one of, and only ONE of, the most obvious examples of journalistic malpractice I’ve seen yet. What Fred Thompson said is NOWHERE NEAR what the media is intentionally spinning it to sound like. Its absolutely criminal what these frauds are allowed to get away with.
arclightzero said,
December 30, 2007 at 8:45 am
Yeah, I read the Register’s inane chatter on Fred. As always, they manage to take things and distort them to fit their own views and agendas. The media has not been kind to Fred. He is not one of their anointed few. Anybody who pays attention to things beyond just the surface stories that the media feeds us can see that the media is trying to run this entire election cycle. The people they are heavily promoting and running cover for are not the best choices for either party, yet they go out of their way to bury the best candidates!
It’s like I pointed out before; the media has done an outstanding job of picking and choosing lines and piecing them together and out of context until they say something that was never actually said even though the words were in fact Fred’s.
Radiant Times said,
December 30, 2007 at 1:05 pm
I’m very sorry, but I cannot help that Thompson is pegged with the tag “lazy” to describe his campaign.
arclightzero said,
December 30, 2007 at 2:19 pm
The problem is that people mistakingly interpret laid back and relaxed as lazy. Politicians are expected to be hyper and on edge, always ready to strike. Look at Clinton. She looks like hell these days because the overdrive campaign that she is running is taking its toll on her.
Fred is not lazy. He is calm and confident. Anybody who has a rudimentary understanding of psychology and group dynamics can see the way Fred handles himself and speaks is very strong and positive. But when people compare him to the other candidates who are buzzing around like gnats on speed, his confidence is incorrectly seen as a lack of energy.
FRedStates.com said,
December 31, 2007 at 4:47 pm
Actually the only people who hit Fred with the “lazy” tag are people who have another horse in the race. And instead of saying anything good about thier candidate they are reduced to bashing rival candidates. And since they can’t find anything wrong with Fred’s conservative principles they resort to name calling. Radiant Times is a perfect example. Comes in here calling Fred lazy… propagating out-of-context quotes in hopes of hurting Fred… yet not offering any alternatives… and upon further examination you learn Radiant Times is on the Huckabee band wagon… funny though she mentions nothing about the qualificatiosn of her candidate or why he’s more qualified to be president than Fred. I guess it’s easier to tear down than to build up.
The substance video is a great example of Fred telling voters whey they should vote for Fred… not why they shouldn’t vote for Huck, Mitt, Rudy, Duncan, John or Paul.
Thank you for this post and for bringing more attention to what’s great about Fred Thompson.
Radiant Times said,
January 1, 2008 at 10:44 pm
While I am on the Huckabee bandwagon, I don’t think Fred is a bad guy. I just don’t think he has the right stuff to be president. There’s an article out today that alludes that Fred will decided whether or not to drop out based on the results of the Iowa caucus.
“Meanwhile, Thompson and his campaign adviser Rich Galen are hinting that the results of Thursday’s caucuses could determine whether the actor and former Tennessee senator has enough money and momentum to continue to other states.” http://www.mcclatchydc.com/election2008/story/24006.html
I know it is disappointing to see your candidate not reach the goals set before him, and if he does drop out, I hope you will consider Huckabee and his stand on issues. He filled in where Fred left off - as an authentic Southern conservative.
Here is Mike’s issues page. I don’t think you will be disappointed. http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.Home
All the best to you.
arclightzero said,
January 2, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Personally, I don’t think that Huck has the right experience to be the man. He has some good positions on some topics, but he also has some really scary positions and opinions… I also fear his overarching concern with religion. As I have said before, the feeling I have always gotten from Huck is that he wants to be the country’s “pastor-in-chief.” I may be wrong in this feeling, but it is simply my gut feeling on the subject.
I am also a fierce global warming skeptic, and Huck’s views on global warming scare the hell out of me. I would like to put as much distance between global warming and politics as possible, and I don’t think Huck is the man to do that.
As you say about Fred, Radiant, I suspect that Huck is a good and sincere man… But I continue to support Fred because of the very reasons you think he is through. Right, wrong or indifferent, we’re all entitled to our opinions… And I have no desire to rail on anybody else for theirs. We will see what comes of things in the coming months.
Radiant Times said,
January 3, 2008 at 10:58 am
Thank you for your respectful response.
It seems to me that none of our present slate of candidates is really “perfect” for the job of POTUS, but I personally believe Huckabee’s experience and perspective makes him more electable. I think if Huckabee had wanted to be “Pastor in Chief” he would have been run out of the Arkansas governor’s office within his first term. I like his track record of working with both parties for the common good, and believe he will be able to do the same with our very sharply divided Congress. Have you read anything about Huckabee’s views on ‘vertical politics’?
About global warming - I personally don’t drink the koolaid there…..and I don’t worship at the shrine of the Goracle. The science behind global warming is crock in my opinion. But I do see relieving ourselves of dependence from the oil that comes from countries that philosophically oppose us a security measure rather than an environmental issue…besides, it is good stewardship.
I understand Fred plans to stay in the running at least until South Carolina - according to the news.
All the best to you. You have a top notch blog and I’m putting you on my list of favorite places. Thanks.
arclightzero said,
January 4, 2008 at 6:48 am
Thanks Radiant, I added you as well.
Agreed, Huck has some good points, but let me ask you about three that aren’t so good and really concern me:
1. Huck wants a constitutional amendment to impose a federal ban on abortion.
2. He wants a federal ban on smoking
3. He has claimed that fighting global warming is our “biblical duty”
What’s your opinion on those points? I’m just curious because those things should really force us to take notice as they fly in the face of conservatism.
Congrats on taking Iowa, by the way. It was a heck of a showing!