Posted on 12/05/2007 6:27:31 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Just one time, I’d appreciate Fredheads taking the time to explain to me why he’s such a good candidate, instead of having my parentage, my intellect, and my manhood flamed because I haven’t taken the Fred Loyalty Oath yet.
He’s a great candidate, as demonstrated by the fact that he is only 3 points behind Ron Paul in NH.
Just wait....once his campaign kicks into high gear, Fred is gonna knock ‘em dead!!!
He’s a solid fourth in Iowa and Florida, also....but just wait...any day now, Fred’s gonna make his move.
Then all of us “naysayers” are gonna have eat crow....Any day now, any day now.
“Maybe, because he is the only conservative candidate running who has even a slight chance of winning. And no Paul and Huckabee are not conservatives.”
To be honest, that’s not really a ringing endorsement of Fred so much as it is an opinion that’s not entirely justified by actual poll numbers. When people ask why they should support a particular candidate “Because he can win!” isn’t really the answer they were angling for. If it was, they would just vote for Giuliani.
I agree with Gamer. Convince me, somebody, instead of breaking out the pom-poms or the flamethrowers.
Regarding the issues? Ask me anything, and I’ll answer it to the best of my ability.
(Without sounding like the MagLaughlin Group)
Issue One: Prosecuting the War...
What experience can Thompson draw upon to better enable him to conduct his mission as C-IN-C?
Issue Two: Fiscal Responsibility...
What political capital is he willing to spend, for such programs as the Permanent Tax Cuts, holding the line on spending (I realistically do NOT expend cuts in spending)?
Issue Three: Homeland Invasion (aka Immigration)...
Has he put forth any steps to be followed in regards to stemming the tide and dealing with the conditions which bring about the Reconquista?
Those are a few that I need answers for.
What experience can Thompson draw upon to better enable him to conduct his mission as C-IN-C?
With regard to experience, I can offer you this:
-As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Thompson focused on the threat of nuclear proliferation and technology transfers that could damage American industrial and national security.
-While a vocal supporter of free trade, Thompson has also fought to link free trade to our national security interests. For example, when voting to grant full-trading status to China, Senator Thompson fought unsuccessfully to include an amendment in the bill that would have required the president to impose sanctions against China if it violated nuclear-nonproliferation agreements.
-Thompson also served on the Intelligence Committee at a time when it examined the failings in intelligence and analysis leading into the September 11th terrorist attacks, as well as the reforms needed to better prepare for future threats.
His plans for the future:
The threats to the United States today are more complex, dispersed, and opportunistic than ever before. Terrorists and terror states observe no rules and have no restraints of conscience. The enemy understands only the language of power. While the central front in the war against Islamic extremism is in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is clear that our enemies extend far beyond those borders. The gravest danger is terrorists or terrorist states acquiring weapons of mass destruction. But other, more traditional, more conventional challenges await us as well. To overcome these dangers, we need a clear and consistent strategy to address them, and the means to be successful.
With the fall of the Soviet Union, many falsely assumed that unquestioned American military superiority was unneeded. Indeed, many Democrats saw the 1990s as an opportunity to take a holiday from history, and as a consequence, our government began one of the largest unilateral reductions of military power in history. Our Armed Forces were cut 30 percent on average. Army combat power was reduced by nearly half, the Air Force down-sized considerably, and the Navy could not maintain 300 ships, much less the 600-ship Navy that President Reagan once envisioned. We are still feeling the effect of these reductions today.
No one will ever doubt the quality of those who serve our nation in the Armed Forces. The brave men and women who comprise our military have answered every call to duty and defended our freedom with honor. During my days in the Senate, I had the privilege to spend time with them as I traveled abroad to meet with world leaders, visit global hotspots, and gain a better understanding of events on the ground in far-away places. Whether at an outpost in Kosovo with U.S. Army troops; watching flight operations with the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps aboard an aircraft carrier in the Indian Ocean; meeting at a darkened Afghan airfield with special operations forces shortly after 9/11; or flying aboard a cargo aircraft with the U.S. Air Force in South America and South Asia. I am always inspired by the courage, competence, and commitment of our men and women in uniform.
But we are fighting a war in two theaters today, against an enemy not bound by borders, using 20th century equipment in a 21st century war. And our material support for our troops has not matched the demands we have placed on them. Their readiness and capabilities could soon be in doubt. We simply have been asking too few troops to do too much for too long.
It is time for real change, not half measures. As we consider the threats we face today, and the ones we may need to confront tomorrow, we must re-evaluate how we look at our priorities. The first responsibility of the federal government must be the security of the American people and the defense of our nation. This should be reflected in everything we do in the federal government, including, most importantly, the budget. Defense spending declined significantly at the end of the Cold War to levels approaching 3% of GDP, despite the fact that America has historically spent well over 5% of GDP on defense. Over the last several decades our economy has proven strong enough to enable 5.1% spending during the Gulf War, over 6% during the Reagan build up, and over 8% during the late 1960s. As a nation, we must be prepared to spend more on defense than what we do today - and have done in the past 15 years - in order to revitalize the military and develop the capabilities necessary to promote peace, security and stability for future generations of Americans.
To address the problems and challenges faced by our Armed Forces today, the following initiatives will put us on the path to revitalizing our all-volunteer military over the coming years, enable the United States to advance its interests abroad, and ensure the long-term security of our nation for decades:
The U.S. military is at a strategic crossroads. Years of neglect, conflict, and long deployments are reducing the readiness, effectiveness and flexibility of the greatest military force in history. It is time to restore President Reagan's promise of "peace through strength" by making the investments and hard decisions necessary to safeguard the nation's long-term security. The fact is, we can and must do this.
The world - friends and foes alike - is watching. We cannot afford to allow our forces to wither and risk conflict. The latter is far more expensive in the long run and much more dangerous. The weaker we become, or appear to become, the more our enemies will be tempted to challenge us and our allies. These are risks we cannot afford to take. Whether we act in time to prevent the worst from happening will be the final measure of America's leadership in the world for years to come. With 9/11 still fresh in our memory, it is for America to shape events, and not be left at their mercy. Wherever dangers appear, we must be prepared to meet them with clarity and resolve. Doing so will take leadership, vision, and a commitment to restore our nation's military strength.
I'm telling you, as President, if the lives of a bunch of American citizens were at stake and I thought that there was a good chance that an individual had information and could impart information that would help save those lives, I'm just saying, that I would do whatever is necessary to get that information from that person. I would authorize that. Whatever is necessary to save a number of American lives (emphatically).
What political capital is he willing to spend, for such programs as the Permanent Tax Cuts, holding the line on spending (I realistically do NOT expend cuts in spending)?
Here is some info on his record:
-As Chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Thompson enacted a law that required federal agencies to calculate and report the cost of regulations on taxpayers and businesses.
-Press reports stated: He put heat on federal agencies by holding hearings on mismanagement and by asking them to tote up the improper payments they made each year. That added up to about $20 billion in taxpayer dollars. His efforts saved taxpayers more than $2 billion in 2005-06 alone at the Department of Health and Human Services.
-He published a report, Government on the Brink, (Volume 1 and Volume 2) detailing the waste, fraud, and abuse of federal agencies as well as the management challenges facing the incoming Bush Administration. Paul Light, a New York University professor and leading expert on government, said, I consider him to be one of the most dedicated overseers of the executive branch of the last 25 years.
-In his eight years, Thompson, who served on the Finance Committee, supported and worked to enact three major tax-cut bills, reducing the federal tax burden on all of us.
The National Taxpayer's Union gives him a lifetime rating of A (88%).
His plan to reform the tax code:
Thompson Plan for Tax Relief and New Economic Growth
In today's competitive global economy, a fair, simple, and pro-growth tax system is essential for America's success. America must be the best place in the world to invest and create high-paying jobs.
Fred Thompson's Plan for Tax Relief and Economic Growth promotes fairness and simplicity in the tax code and will create greater growth in the economy. It is based on a fundamental assumption that keeping tax rates low increases economic growth and enhances American competitiveness in the global economy. Increased economic growth will lead to higher wages and higher levels of employment in America. Equally important, lower taxes enhance the personal and economic freedom of all Americans by allowing them to keep more of their hard-earned dollars. Allowing Americans to control their own financial future has been integral to our nation's economic success and strength since its founding, and is the key to our future.
The economic proposals offered by Democrats will move us in the wrong direction -- their plan for higher taxes, in particular, will reduce America's competitiveness, push investment and jobs overseas, and send more of workers' and families' income to Washington. The conservative approach is to reduce government spending and return more money to America's families.
The following elements of the Thompson Plan for Tax Relief and Economic Growth will spur economic growth and move the nation towards a fairer, simpler tax system on the way to Fred Thompson's ultimate goal of fundamental tax reform.
America 's economic future depends on our nation's ability to maintain its competitive and innovative spirit. Solutions to challenges in our economy are found in the homes and small businesses of ordinary Americans, not in the halls of Washington. Fred Thompson's goal is to allow Americans to retain greater control of their own money.
To do that, Fred Thompson believes we need a more limited, more effective federal government. Currently, government spending is projected to grow at nearly twice the rate of inflation over the next several years. This spending path is unsustainable and will hamper our economy unless fiscal discipline is imposed. It is critical that we address the problem of government spending, especially for entitlement programs, if the U.S. economy is grow and thrive in the coming decades.
The Thompson Plan for Tax Relief and Economic Growth provides commonsense solutions to increase American competitiveness in the 21st century. These solutions will allow Americans to keep more of their money and encourage companies and entrepreneurs to invest and create jobs in the United States. Enhancing the choices of taxpayers, permanently reducing taxes, encouraging investment in America's corporations and small businesses, and restraining government spending are all steps in the right direction. America's economy has endured several challenges over the last several years -- it is time to move forward and enter a new era of economic security and prosperity.
Issue Three: Homeland Invasion (aka Immigration)...
Has he put forth any steps to be followed in regards to stemming the tide and dealing with the conditions which bring about the Reconquista?
Securing the Border and Enforcing the Law
A fundamental responsibility of the federal government is to secure the nation's borders and enforce the law. The following policies and initiatives will put the nation on a path to success:
Improving the Legal Immigration Process
The United States is a nation of immigrants. We must continue to welcome immigrants and foreign workers who come to our country legally, giving priority to those who can advance the nation's interests and common good. Immigrants and foreign workers who play by the rules need to be rewarded with faster and less burdensome service, not delays that last years. Advancing the following initiatives will require close cooperation between all levels of government, the business community, and concerned citizens:
When Fred Thompson came out with a detailed immigration policy this fall, I knew it was very good but was too busy leading the fight against amnesties in the Senate to give thorough attention.
Reading Thompsons full proposed immigration policy this afternoon, I am blown away by its depth, its breadth and at how it would so fundamentally change Americans future for the better.
It's true that Numbers USA has been critical of Thompson in the past (mostly over LEGAL immigration issues, as they want a reduction in immigration overall), however Mr. Beck went further in his analysis:
As a Senator from Tennessee in the 1990s, Thompson had a mixed record on immigration. I've studied that record and believe it reflects the problem that we saw even in some of this year's Senate heroes who also were mediocre in the 1990s -- most of them just weren't paying much attention to this issue in the 1990s (just like a lot of you have only become active on this during the last couple of years).
NumbersUSA always gives ample credit to politicians who turn from bad or mediocre records and decide to become our champions. But less-than-stellar past records require us to look for signs of sincerity and assurance that they will follow through on their promises.
With Thompson, we will be watching closely for these signs. One strong point for him is that he finished his Senate career with an A-minus performance in 01/02 term after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And since coming out with his official stance, he has not been equivocating when asked about immigration in media appearances or in strong immigration ads.
Sorry that’s formatted so poorly. I had a lot of digging to do to find you answers and copy-and-pasted stuff from different sources.
Wit all due respect, it’s not our job to cater to every old coot’s idisyncratic notions about his own importance.
Old Sarge, here what I tell my investor friends. Do your OWN research. Don’t try to piggyback off me.
Same to you old Sarge, all the data is out there. This isn’t a product somebody is trying to sell to you. This is about YOU getting YOURSELF informed aout the critical issues affecting you, your kids and your grandkids.
This isn’t about Fred Thompson - or “fredheads” trying to convince folks how great he is.
So read up, and don’t blame anyone but yourself if you find yourself at the recieving end of the next Democrat in the White House.
WOW!
You are doing all Old Sarge’s work for him. You’ll just make him lazy and unfit.
It was worth doing, as I learned a few new facts in the process.
Old Sarge,
Did this answer your questions adequately?
Thank you both, it helps a lot.
For once, I get a little more honesty and courtesy on a FR thread - it’s a real refreshing change.
I asked, he answered. LS was courteous.
He didn’t infer I was lazy. However, you did. I tell my young soldiers not to be afraid to ask. You made it sound as if asking questions is insulting to you.
Thank you for proving what I was talking about in Post 2.
I respect LS and SoConPubbie for the respect that they showed to you, and the help they gave you. I also noted that you were respectful in response. I would have been more respectful myself if it hadn't been for this:
Just one time, Id appreciate Fredheads taking the time to explain to me why hes such a good candidate, instead of having my parentage, my intellect, and my manhood flamed because I havent taken the Fred Loyalty Oath yet.
I took these remarks as expressions of open hostility, not simple honest inquiry - and the remarks you made came stright from you with no prior inflammatory remark aimed in your direction.
I'll apologize for taking you on in the way I did, but hou have to atleast recognize the role you played in setting up the situation.
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.