Fred Nails Dems on Tax Policy

If you missed Fred Thompson’s speech at the 2008 Republican National Convention today you can view it on YouTube or read the text at CNN.

My favorite bit concerned the Dem tax policies:

Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases.

They tell you they are not going to tax your family.

No, they’re just going to tax "businesses"! So unless you buy something from a "business", like groceries or clothes or gasoline … or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small "business", don’t worry … it’s not going to affect you.

They say they are not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the "other" side of the bucket! That’s their idea of tax reform.


Still a Fred Head

Fred Dalton Thompson is back dispensing his wisdom and sharing his opinion, blogging on A portion of his first article:

First, conservatism is alive and well in America; don’t let anyone tell you differently. And by conservatism, I don’t mean the warmed-over “raise your hand if you believe …” kind of conservatism we see blooming every election cycle. No, I’m speaking of the conservatism grounded in principles based upon enduring truths: an understanding of the importance of human nature in the affairs of individuals and nations. Respect for the lessons of history, the importance of faith and tradition. The understanding that while man is prone to err, he is capable of great things when not subjugated by a too-powerful government. These are the principles that inspired our Founding Fathers, and resulted in a Constitution that delineated the powers of the central government, established checks and balances among the branches of government and further diffused governmental power by a system of Federalism.

I missed ya, Fred. Glad to have you back.

Technorati Tags:
Posted May 16th, 2008 Filed in Thompson, Fred

FDT Says "Not Interested" in being VP

I keep hoping that McCain will do something that will want to make me vote for him, but Fred Thompson shot down the biggest thing McCain could do before the question was even asked. In an interview on last night’s Hannity and Colmes, Fred said he had no interest in being the vice president and if McCain actually posed the question, would advise him to get someone else with "a different profile".

It’s not what I want. The presidency is the only job in town that’s worth going through what you’ve got to go through to get it. And that includes the vice presidency and all of the rest of them, as far as I’m concerned.

And I thought I had an opportunity to do some things a different way. And if I was successful, I could lead in a different way. That didn’t work out. I’m interested in absolutely nothing else other than doing what I can to help those who are trying to help this country, and be a good citizen and do those things that I can do now in the private sector to help these kids and grandchildren.

But that does not involve, you know, going to state funerals in faraway places.

And that last statement is why I love Fred.

Posted April 25th, 2008 Filed in Thompson, Fred

The Decision of a Lifetime

As I look at the array of available candidates left in the smoking ruins of the 2008 presidential primaries, several things occur to me. First, I understand the Left being jerked to the left by the and George Soros crowd. I really do. It makes sense. The socialists have taken control of the liberal movement.

But what the hell is jerking MY party to the left?

Why is it that there is not a single candidate that represents anything even close to what I believe?

Where was I when Reaganism died?

With "Bye, Bye Miss American Pie" playing softly in my head (now with new meaning — think about it), I return to the question I have been struggling with since Fred Thompson left the race: who do I support now?

Given that Huckabee and Giuliani seem to be lost causes (not that I could support either one, anyway), and given that I do not consider doing nothing a viable option, I am left with seven choices.

I could support Mitt Romney, the man that went to Michigan and made promises no one could possibly keep in order to woo Detroit voters. The man whose campaign spread a lie in order to suppress support of Thompson during the crucial Iowa caucus. The man that has flip-flopped on at least 15 issues, including my beloved Second Amendment.

I could support John McCain, war hero and experienced Senator. Of course, Ann Coulter properly points out that McCain’s "Straight Talk Express" takes a very crooked path as he "enthusiastically (promotes) amnesty for illegal aliens, Social Security credit for illegal aliens, criminal trials for terrorists, stem-cell research on human embryos, crackpot global warming legislation and free speech-crushing campaign-finance laws." Not to mention his repeated opposition to the Bush tax cuts, waterboarding terrorists and drilling in the ANWR. And Ann completely left out McCain’s poor record on gun rights and that he is a danger to the Second Amendment.

I believe Mitt will tell voters anything they want to hear, and will take his own liberal path when elected. With McCain, at least I know what I’m getting. The trouble is, apart from the continued prosecution of the War on Islamofascism, I don’t like much of it.

I could support Ron Paul, a man who absolutely will not prosecute the War on Islamofascism. So no, I won’t vote for him. Besides, as the Club for Growth said, the man is a purist to a fault (literally).

And so I come to choices 4 through 6: Hillary, Edwards or Obama. That’s right, I could cross party lines in the primary and vote Democrat.

On the night of the Iowa caucus, I listened to the speeches of Edwards, Hillary and Obama. I will tell you now that Edwards’ and Hillary’s speeches scared me to the point that I decided right then and there that if either one of them is elected then I’m joining a militia to prepare for the coming disintegration of the Union. In fact, if I can’t find a militia then I’m going to start one. Buy a few hundred acres of Tennessee wilderness and go practice war and survival.

Obama’s speech was scary, but not to the point where I fear for the survival of my offspring. I can see me crossing the line to vote for him.

One major problem: I want to support someone in a local race (Bill Giannini for county Tax Assessor!) and voting in the Democrat primary would make that impossible. I have a larger impact in local races, so the Democrat options are out (until November, that is).

My seventh and final option is to vote for Fred Thompson in the primary (he is still on the Tennessee ballot) and Libertarian in the fall. I could easily get behind Wayne Allyn Root. These would be pure protest votes, a message to the collective GOP that they no longer represent me. [Besides, I saw Root speak at the Conservative Leadership Conference and absolutely loved him. His speech is on YouTube and also his campaign site.]

You often hear people say that they didn’t leave the party, the party left them. I used to feel that way. But now I feel that I didn’t leave the party, the party has run screaming past trying to be "moderate" to a total abandonment of all that makes it a force for good in this dangerous world.

And so I am decided. Fred Thompson in the primary. Then a few months to think about it with a probable vote for Wayne Allyn Root (current frontrunner in the Libertarian race) in the fall.

Update: The Fourth Horseman writes via email:

The only real issue I see between McCain and Clinton is Iraq, and I don’t think there will be that much difference in the result once Clinton stops running to the left, i.e. after she has the nomination.  I am almost to the point of "let them have it for four years" and then let’s see if we can’t have a candidate who can get it right. That might be better than letting McCain "work" with the Dems to pass "bi-partisan" socialist legislation.

To which Advised by Wolves responds:

Agreed. . . Either a McCain or a Clinton Presidency will be a failure. Let the “D” get the blame.

My problem with that is the fact that it would be Clinton with a Democrat (of the Pelosi flavor) congress working together — a dangerous combination that could very well do irreparable harm to our flavor of freedom. Besides, with the press solidly on Hillary’s side, the fact that the presidency is a failure won’t come out for another 20 years. Just look at how many people still think Bill will be thought of kindly by history.

Still, their positions lend credence to my support of the Libertarian option.

David Limbaugh Backs Thompson

From Townhall:

But as I’ve stated before, I believe Fred Thompson is a reliable, consistent conservative. There are others in the field I could support, but not without some reservations. The more I learn about Fred and observe him in action, the more convinced I become that he’s the right choice.

There’s much more.

Posted January 18th, 2008 Filed in Races of '08, Thompson, Fred

American Thinker Right on Fred Thompson

An excellent article on The Anti Soundbite Candidate:

But Fred Thompson is perhaps the most substantative candidate to run for President in many years. He has taken the time to think about what should be the relationship between the government and the governed. He has framed his thoughts within the context of a set of bedrock conservative principles that animates his thinking and generates sound ideas about where America should be headed.

There is a heft to Thompson, a seriousness of purpose that none of the other candidates can match. It is most pronounced during the debates where Thompson’s answers to questions are more subtle and nuanced than those of his rivals. His sometimes laconic style zings his opponents with brutal accuracy. Often, the candidate will answer a question by stating "Yep" or "Nope" and pause a few seconds to gather his thoughts. What follows is almost always coherent and is informed by years of experience in government.

Posted January 18th, 2008 Filed in Races of '08, Thompson, Fred

OHE: Politico Sinks to "Dirty Tricks"

Jed Babbin from Online Human Events agrees with my earlier assessment of the Politico hit piece:

The rumor that Fred Thompson will quit the Republican presidential race if he finishes poorly in Iowa is not only false: it rises to the level of a political dirty trick aimed at reducing Thompson-backers’ turnout in tonight’s Iowa caucuses. . . .

Sources told me that Thompson’s campaign was already moving elements to South Carolina where they expect to do very well.  If Thompson finished at the bottom of the pack in Iowa — which seems very unlikely — he would have to reassess his overall chances.  But that seems unlikely.  And Iowa is not a determinative race for the Republicans. It is very likely to be of lesser importance than a host of others, as John McCain, Rudy Giuliani — and Thompson — are betting.  A candidate could easily go from a defeat there to win the nomination. . . .

In every political season, there are dirty tricks like this. Some originate from opposing camps and some from the media themselves. The Politico story is of the sort that even the television networks have managed to avoid.  Saying that Thompson is going to quit after Iowa on the morning of the caucuses there is like announcing the election night results in New York and the Carolinas before the polls close on the West Coast.  If even CBS News wouldn’t pull a stunt like that, why would The Politico?

Posted January 3rd, 2008 Filed in Media Spin, Thompson, Fred

Thompson Denies Politico Hit Piece

The influential web site Politico has tried discounting Thompson in the past (see Thompson is running low on options), but stooped to a new low with a hit piece titled Thompson may drop out, back McCain on the day that  Iowan voters go to caucus.

Fred Thompson is experiencing a "late-breaking surge" in Iowa (according to Zogby) on the heels of his bold message to Iowa caucus goers in which he appealed to Republicans and conservative Democrats. The effectiveness of Thompson’s message scares liberals, which is why he has been largely ignored by the MSM in favor of the myth that voters have only the Rudy-Mitt choice to make.

Politico claims that "officials close to Fred Thompson’s presidential campaign" revealed that Fred would drop out if he does poorly in Iowa. Only a fool would believe that anyone on or even "close" to the campaign would utter such a statement at this critical juncture. And to cite multiple sources is beyond understanding.

Thompson’s actual campaign is denying the story, of course. Byron York posts on NRO that he had personally talked to Rich Galen, a top advisor to Thompson. Not only did Galen deny the story, but:

Galen also said that no one inside the campaign was a source for the story. "I can’t put enough adjectives in front of the ‘deny’ to accurately describe how vehemently I’m denying the story," he said.

Galen said that "just to make sure," he checked with Thompson himself, who told him the story was not true. "We have the schedule for Saturday and Sunday in New Hampshire, and then we’re going down to South Carolina," Galen told me.

Now, if the Politico’s hit piece fails to stop the Fredmentum in Iowa, the question becomes: will it actually throw attention his way in New Hampshire and South Carolina?

As for me, I favor a class action suit on the part of all Thompson backers against the Politico for printing an obviously false story with the intent to kill our candidate’s chances. Anyone want to take the case?

Posted January 3rd, 2008 Filed in Media Spin, Races of '08, Thompson, Fred

Thompson Busts a Move

When Thompson’s bus tour of Iowa is done, he will have visited more than 50 cities and towns covering 75% of Iowa’s caucus-goers. This is important, because a poll released yesterday showed that 8 percent of Democrats and 12 percent of Republican likely voters in Iowa are still in the "undecided" category.

In a bold effort to sway these caucus-goers, Fred Thompson has recorded a 17 minute video in which he makes his case as to why he should be our next president. In a unique move, he includes an appeal to Democrats. In part:

So this election is important not just to enact our conservative principles. This election is important to salvage a once-great political party from the grip of extremism and shake it back to its senses. It’s time to give not just Republicans but independents, and, yes, good Democrats a chance to call a halt to the leftward lurch of the once-proud party of working people.

Here is the entire video, via YouTube:

Peter Robinson, writing on the corner at NRO, has this to say about the message:

This is reminiscent of Reagan’s talk to the people of North Carolina in 1976. Simple, straightforward, modest production values—just the candidate in front of an American flag and an Iowa flag—but (to use the word again) compelling. Reagan’s 1976 talk enabled him to recover after a string of primary defeats, winning in North Carolina, then going on to come within a handful of delegates of wresting the nomination from Ford. Will Thompson’s talk move voters in Iowa? Does his campaign have the money to get it on the air? Throughout the state? Or even in a few of the most important markets? Beats me. But we have here a serious man, making a serious case—and doing so in the context of a campaign that has otherwise descended into mere caterwauling.

Even at this late hour, I wouldn’t count Fred out.

Watch the video above. If you agree that Fred is the best candidate, consider helping him to get his message to the voters by using the gadget below to make a contribution to his campaign. You’ll note that the default amount is only 25 dollars. Feel free to increase that amount, but know this — if just three people contribute a mere $25, Fred can put another ad on the radio. It might just be the ad that convinces another Iowan to back Fred Dalton Thompson, the Clear Conservative Choice.

First Name:
Last Name:
Posted December 31st, 2007 Filed in Thompson, Fred

Tennessean: Unleash the Fredmentum

Justin Wax from the Tennessean supported Huckabee, even to the point of sending him an early campaign contribution.  But then he started learning the facts:

I was completely shocked when I read an Arkansas Leader article stating Huckabee issued more than 700 commutations and pardons during his tenure, more than Arkansas’ six neighboring states combined. I was even more repulsed when I learned the list of pardons and commutations included convicted murderers and rapists.

As a fiscal conservative, I was annoyed with Huckabee’s protectionist-sounding rhetoric and particularly his name-calling, labeling the conservative group Club for Growth, the "Club for Greed." His immigration policies as governor also gave me cause for concern, but I pushed all of Huckabee’s faults to the back of my mind, instead choosing to dwell on his pro-life record and position on the war. However, when I studied the Wayne Dumond story and Huckabee’s "desire" to see the convicted rapist released into society, alarm bells went off. After reading the Arkansas Leader article on Huckabee’s shocking propensity to side with convicted murderers and rapists over victims, I meekly pulled off my Huckabee bumper stickers.

Wax then lists his problems with the rest of the "conservative" candidates:

  • I weeded out Giuliani because of his lack of integrity (multiple adulteries) and for his abortion, gun control and immigration policies.
  • I never seriously considered Paul either due to his naivety on national security, specifically his anti-war rhetoric and his kooky ideas to abolish the CIA and FBI.
  • But [McCain] alienated social conservatives by championing campaign finance "reform," and he kicked conservatives down the road on judges with his gang of 14 "grand compromise."
  • With Mitt, I have no idea what I’m getting because he had a history of running on one platform and embracing another once he entered office. Mitt’s positions also seem more political than principled.

As nice a summation as I have seen, although I have problems with McCain that aren’t listed, primarily the fact that he hates both the First and Second amendments.

Now go read Wax’s excellent reasoning as to why Thompson is his choice for president. Money quote:

Thompson "hands down" possesses excellent judgment, and he will win because he is the most reliable, consistent, principled conservative in this race. Unleash the Fredmentum.